I really am not generally one for 'conspiracy' theories and really tried to find a balanced and informed view point for this video.. but am really starting to wonder if all this technology is leaving us very vulnerable. I do NOT think this is a concerted, conjoined effort to control us but it seems we ourselves are laying the foundations for someone to misuse that technology in the future. Legislation currently protects us to a degree but legislation can be changed. What do you think?
Things can get out of hand very quickly with conspiracy theories. Before you know it they are being stated as fact. We the public always need to keep ourselves informed of the legislation that is being proposed by our government whatever their colour. There is no point me saying 'I never watch the news' and then complaining about what legislation is brought in. That may sound obvious but I think Tim mentioned it in the video that we should look at who we vote into power and their policies. Aii very important in my opinion.
There's no big grand conspiracy and puppetmaster, but there's a creeping authoritarian mindset which is just as damaging. As you say we are creating tools that will be misused later. Not can, but will - because the kinds of people who would misuse them in a heartbeat are already pushing for them to exist.
I think We are lucky to live or to choose to live in a democratic country, the technology is there to control us already, I've mentioned in previous video comments that anything can happen in the future, but there would need to be big changes in the EU constitution, then we can just stop or vote for different people. I sincerely don't believe it is going to happen. Drive your car now! don't be trapped thinking about the future! (that don't exist) keep your joy of fixing a car or diving it. Please don't do video so bothering ,miss confusing and so negative also on the way is being presented ! This is not you in my opinion
My daughter took out a "Black Box" reduced price car insurance; however, she lives in a part of London with a blanket 20mph limit and was continually being tailgated, beeped, finger-flicked, etc, for sticking to the speed limit. After 6 months, she got a letter from the insurance company saying that she would have to improve her driving due to frequent "speeding" at 22mph otherwise they would cancel her cover and refuse to insure her. This would obviously give her a major problem when trying to renew with a different company so she just cancelled the policy and took the cancellation fees as a loss. The black box is still wired into the car though and wasn't requested for return. We have taken a record of the IMEI number in case it is stolen and maybe that could be used to help trace it - but I have zero confidence that insurance companies or the police would be interested.
The claims guru has more faith in politicians than I do. The automation of cars is the thin end of the wedge just like central bank digital currency and health passports
You could not be further from the truth... I have no faith in our politicians, as for Central banking, digital currency, it is part of the WEF's Agenda
Thanks Jack for doing this video. Many salient points in the video and comments. For anyone who has worked on cars that are a few years old, modern sensors are a never ending source of frustration. Everything is built to a cost and fully integrated sensors will fail. There will be a time when the car is sending incorrect data that will affect your insurance premiums, refuse to start or move, or cause an accident. The end consumer who has no control will ultimately be finically responsible.
Excellent comment, but taking it further, the fault potential you mention could be instrumental in causing potentially life threatening situations when used in the V2X autonomous system. As an electronics/systems engineer, I would be very wary of trusting my life to the complex digital systems discussed here and I can’t see all these systems being designed to be fully fail safe. Such systems are never 100% glitch immune.
@@user-rf9me7xm1w Don't get me wrong here, I hate this Orwellian future we are marching toward, but I think a standard response to what you've said is, no matter how faulty the technology is, humans will always be worse. Sensors and computers can fail, but never at the rate of a distracted or drunk driver. I'm guessing this will be one of the arguments used to force this technology down our throats.
@@ProfessorOzone. You have no idea what you’re talking about. If a wire or a sensor fails that equals a stroke in a human, and the computer simply loses touch with reality. After that absolutely anything can happen. I’ve seen a lot of it in my commercial rigs and in passenger vehicles.
@@ProfessorOzone You ever repair electrical systems? Genius? You may intellectually believe that the man versus computer control, is just a ‘Safety Issue’ , but if you’ve had to deal with the phenomenon you might realize that there is a lot more to it all. Firstly they are extremely complex and therefore fail in unimagined ways. That causes a cascade of problems from excessive downtime to overrun shop facilities to reeducation needs for the technicians to reconfiguration of system hardware and software and so on. Through all that you have removed all skills and abilities from the owners and operators leaving behind a fragile system that is a disaster already happening.
The government has pushed through with EV at a pace that every real domestic issue should have been tackled. The only reason is to push an agenda that asserts the government control over every aspect of our life. I understand this is about vehicles, vehicle types and insurance only the broader picture is how every aspect of our lives are controlled to the point we have no rights or freedoms thus heading to a bottlenecked existence under a dictatorship. Thank you for the video. This is 1 of a dozen issues pointing to us being forced in the wrong direction. EV by themselves have started showing how completely useless they are overall- Check any dealer that will repair your EV after you hit a pothole rendering your car a potential death trap. You you find any, it will be a write off. No body shop or service garage even have the equipment to deal with these issues that doesnt charge more than the value of a new vehicle. So how is this better for the environment and everyday people? No country has the infrastructure to support anything being forced on us with a target date of 2035. Big Brother in our pay, jobs, PRIVATE (joke) bank accounts and cars. Next we will be forced to have BBC regardless so the government that already has the station will use it to monitor in our homes. Invest in the communities, give back the appearance of hope and the people will respond in a positive manner. Shackle everyone in hopes you brainwash a generation of brainwashed children to follow the new regime and end up with a Guy Fawkes. He knew better, very few listened.
A valuable topic to explore and well presented. My take away is to avoid buying new vehicle, but to keep one that I can still control and maintain. Classics may enjoy a long life yet.
While I would like to agree with you, the controllers will simply restrict the provision of spare parts. For many manufacturers it’s already getting harder to obtain new spares for vehicles more than ten years old. For volume manufacturers, used spares will provide parts almost indefinitely. Legal permission to use them is a different matter. Government will come up with lies to restrict older vehicles ostensibly on pollution grounds.
@@GT380man : Your last point is a good one. Government always ignores the fact that it is far more polluting to manufacture a brand new vehicle than it is to keep driving an existing vehicle.
His thesis seems to be, "Don't worry, they are not allowed to do that, and they wouldn't anyway." Lol - I was born yesterday so I believe him completely.
This guru is working within the system. He therefore cannot see the bigger picture. I think the goal is up to 80% less cars on the road, all of the triggers for this are in place. EVs and the lack of infrastructure, the mot, the insurance costs, the salty roads , 15 mins cities. Whi owns all of these big companies that us also an important question.
@@jackcollins156Agree completely except I expect it to be an even bigger reduction. No private transport whatsoever. Lined up with UN2030 SGDs. What most people don’t realise is that among the goals agreed decades ago is to reduce the population. Cairo Agreement iirc. The means were not specified. I now know one of them. Because it’s happened bang in my domain of professional expertise.
Even when data is made "anonymous" it's still possible to connect it to a specific individual to it by putting multiple bits and pieces of information together.
It can be established with almost complete certainty in many cases as I understand it, even within a single supposedly anonymized dataset, when there is a lot to work with or the individual stands out in more than one way in the data.
Exactly as is done through information brokers with smartphones. Next time you're about to install an application on your smartphone look at the data it wants from you.
The closing thought from Tim about influencing this stuff through the ballot box was, perhaps, the most concerning. I can't see either of the main political parties in the UK advocating for the motorist, despite what they may say.
They were both in favour of depriving us of our liberties for months for no reason whatsoever. They lied and are still lying about “pandemics”. They both were willing to coerce injections into people not even notionally at risk. When was government ever genuinely interested in your wellbeing? That’ll be never. Both favour digital ID which serves only the control agenda. Both favour CBDCs.
We have to influence this with our dollars. Boycott everything that doesnt stand for what we want. Let’s fund a new insurance company that doesnt do all of this BS
Why in God's name are YOU - or indeed anyone - voting for LIB/LAB/CON, they are all left-leaning woke clubs? Always do what you've always done and always get what you've always got!
Tim contacted me to try and 'debunk' some of this stuff after my video on the whistleblower hit 400k views, but we couldn't get our schedules to align before Christmas, however I do now find it quite funny that the 'debunk' is more 'yeah this is all happening but it's OK because I have a northern accent'. 2024/25 are going to be interesting.
This guy must be a paid shill, unless there is legislation to protect the general public from all these invassive measures to get us off the road, then they will all happen, he didn't debunk jack imo
People shouldn't be buying into this rubbish - it's yet more of the 'syops' recently employed by the state, designed purely to destabilise, cause unrest and keep people on the back foot.
We veered away from the letter you referred to, which I can debunk pretty much all of it, but in our recording( with Jack), we decided to change the narrative away from the letter, and more to what is "Factual". Which I was happy to do. The topics in the letter on both Insurance and Technology are all areas I provide consultancy on, and I am more than happy to do a vid with you and go through the letter. It is significant/pertinent that it is made clear what information Insurers can use, and they Absolutely cannot and will not be able to control a vehicle, where in the future ( 2050 potentially), only a peer-to-peer network would be able to do. The letter you referred to in your video is is "manufactured" for a point, the points raised has potential credibility, the letter does not. Not sure what bearing my accents has, but thank you.
@@motorclaimguruI'd love to know what your thoughts are on 15 minute cities, CBDC digital social credit score system and facial recognition cameras that are being installed everywhere, is this all bollocks too? If you really can't see that all this IS about control, restricting the population,...I don't know what else to say to be honest.
Seems to me that a lot of what was said in the letter has been disproven… 1. alcoguard linked to insurance companies and fitted to all cars - no 2. Older cars not being able to get insured - no 3. Data harvesting.. yes but anonymous and NOT with real time links to insurers who then adjust their premiums to suit. -- there is potentially an issue going forward but it’s important to try and stick to proven information so we can act on it properly. It’s just too easy to write an ‘anonymous’ letter with loads of allegations and little to back them up. Also don’t think insulting Northern accents is a particularly helpful addition to the debate.
While I've seen so many videos over 2023 and 2022 about political leftist nonsense But also how dangerous technology has really become and how the Government controls us. I'm still waiting on people to go into lock step and revolt against this shit and over throw the government and powers at play. I'm well aware of what's going on but no one is actually doing anything other than creating talking points about it. It's like me saying I'm aware I'm eating unhealthy but nothing will change until I take action to change that. Also no Voting doesn't fix this. Also overall mental health has gone to shit as a society and I can't help but think this is one of the reasons that some commit suicide because things are objectively bad and nothing has shown that anything is getting any better. So they say to themselves ..Why should I suffer in such a shit world now?
I think a question I ask is will young people still care about learning to drive? It was a right of passage when I was growing up but my son isn't bothered about learning. I figured he would change his mind but he's 25 now and still not interested. If the enjoyment is sucked out of the process it will just become a part of a job I would imagine. You have ability to drive you get paid more, but I can't see why young people would be enthusiastic to learn because of the pleasure that we used to obtain from driving. Very very interesting show thanks both of you.
That's why I sold my MX5 after just 1600 miles. Much better off driving my 07 diesel Octavia which is comfortable and ridiculously economical. I once drove over to Wales with the Madza and found SEVEN miles of decent not camera'ed road - out of a total distance of 137 miles...
100% getting a 25 to leave the house away from the computer is next to impossible now, when they do they are on the phone anyway. My son grew up riding dirt bikes, go carts, snowmobiles. 24 this year and still has no drivers license. I have been on him since 16 as years of record make a difference on insurance. At this point I believe he would be just as happy to be driven everywhere the rest of his life. I make him walk and tell him if he wants a ride then pay for it, my time +fuel insurance, 10% repair cost both ways x2. So he choses to walk. I turned 16 and had my ticket to drive the same day, written test, driving test, plated and insured my 1976 CB 360t honda motorcycle and drove off. Kids today do not seek freedom like we did, I blame the education system for destroying the though of free speech. So glad to be at the end side of life. Knowing I live in the best of times the world has ever seen. FREEDOM WITH minimal government.
My only real concerns here are; the potential to take away our ability to control where we go and what we do, that the system will be more open to abuse by any party, and we will have to reply on the technology around us working without fault 100% of the time. Great discussion, lots of good and not so good, makes you think doesn't it, what will the future hold...
Depends on how it's being implemented, it will definitely get abused that's for sure. Perhaps they could ban the people who cause the accidents, that would lower premiums and make the roads safer. It's about money.
I think your classic cars being monitored by other cars all the time will only apply in built up areas Jack. Stick to the quiet roads you do test drives on and you'll be fine ;-) I still think it would be more likely that eventually insurance companies would want all cars (including classic cars) fitted with black boxes and there will be a campaign at some point to persuade us it will be in our interests to do so e.g. currently my energy company is constantly harassing me to install a smart meter as it is in my interest to do so apparently
And no government has brought in, or intends to bring in legislation to allow energy companies to force you to have a smart meter fitted. Why this constant paranoia? Who cares what the very few drivers of classic cars are doing? Most are sensible. People who drive cheap old cars, which will fall into the same 'unconnected' group will end up having their car written off if they have an accident. If an accident they are involved in is fatal, or causes serious injury, the police will no doubt issue a report, and the insurance company may well use that to refuse to compensate the first party if they are proven to be at fault. So, the only people who will be high-risk to the insurance company are those with valuable classic cars who, by definition, are going to be driving much more carefully, and over considerably less miles.
As far as I'm concerned a smart meter will only benefit the energy company - I'll still use whatever I need to use, regardless of what the smart meter tells me.
I agree entirely, it's all about the next step, when the meter can be used to stop supply. . . . Oh . . And the days of using before paying are coming to an end. . . . We will all be paying in advance. I asked an engineer who came to install one ( with an apprentice). . . " What is easier, installing one of these in every house in the UK, or just texting me once a month/quarter for a meter reading ? No real answer forthcoming I'm afraid. I have turned mine off
Unless the smart meter will actually save me money then I don't want one. I'm quite happy to send them the reading myself every month and don't buy the "save you money" and "no more estimated readings" rhetoric they push. I suspect it will eventually become mandatory though or it will cost people more not to have one. Back to cars ... my dealership asked last year if I wanted a black box installed "free of charge" so I could track all my journeys/fuel economy on an app on a phone. Again, totally for my benefit and no mention of them using my data. They seemed slightly puzzled/disappointed when I politely declined their offer :-)
Quite a few thoughts on this excellent piece: Surely if 'interconnected cars' are going to be such a fantastic thing, we will only need fire and theft insurance🤷 Yet we all know most insurance companies a parts of larger financial institutions whose only SIM is to make as much money as possible with the minimal risk ..... so premiums will NOT reduce! As for Alcoguard how do you regulate who provides the breathe sample...and does it tackle the equally important issue of driving under the influence of drugs (recreational or prescription). I think as you highlighted with introduction of average speed cameras it's opening a Pandora's Box!
The premiums are set by underwriting (calculating risk) and adjusted by the market. The insurance system is centruries old, developing very slowly at large. Some bits of coverage (car glass, for instance) is continually making a loss, and it's gotten much worse the last few years, with windscreens costing £2500 instead of £250 (sensors, cameras and allsorts), while being thinner to save weight and emissions, which makes them break more often. The premium for this bit is about £50 per year, depending. No single insurance company can increase this premium to where it should be (£250, perhaps?) without losing business. "Luckily", there are other coverages that traditionally offset this by a margin. The business is making a healthy profit, for sure, but the competition keeps the premiums about as low as they can be and still pay everyone involved. (Gas/electricity, investors, banks, landlords, reinsurers, employees etc.) In fact, in periods where the insurance companies earn a lot of money on investments, the premiums can be too low to produce a profit on their own. Also, the EU demands a lot from the business and monitors it closely, which is good. Duckduckgo EIOPA for more info.
In Victoria Australia, we have what we call an alcohol Interlock Device, where the device is installed in the car of a convicted drink driver. The driver needs to blow into the device, and return a 0 alcohol level, and that is every time they want to start the car. Some were getting around the device by having family members, or mates blow into it, but now there is a camera in the device to make sure the driver is the one blowing into the device. The system is controlled via the Courts, and the Police, and it depends on the Court’s how long the device stays connected to the car.
I have been asking for years the question of who needs to be insured for the consequences of an accident of a "driverless" car. Is it the writer of the software, the maker of the control system, or the manufacturer of the vehicle? It surely can't be the owner, who is merely another passenger. Nobody ever seems to have an answer.
@@The_Original_Geoff_B Most jurisdictions it is mandatory by law to have vehicle insurance. Whether it is private insurance or government run insurance the vehicle owner pays the premium. It will take massive class action law suits against the vehicle mfg's, software co's & government road infrastructure holders to change the status quo where the liability now falls on them in the case of autonomous vehicles for insurance to be dropped from being levied as a premium against vehicle owners. Expect to pay for auto insurance for a long time to come............unless those said parties are forced by the public at large into paying for it............in which case they will end their production of autonomous vehicles because their liability will be too high.
Sounds like driving classic cars will be much more fun in the future. You can drive like you're on a rally stage, and all the autonomous vehicles will see you and do their best to get out of your way, while at the same time warning other autonomous vehicles that you are coming so they can get out of your way too!
Another "benefit" of being in an AV is that wily pedestrians will see you coming and step out in front of you, just because they know it'll stop. You'll never reach your destination! 🙂
Exactly that. "I'd like to have the Evo Triangle to myself and a few friends for half an hour on the 20th and I'll happily pay the £xx charge for there to be no speed limits" - makes more financial sense than driving all the way to the Nurburgring for the same experience.
@@stevemawer848 Yes, this very thing has occurred to me too. You can bet that it will happen in any town centre on a Friday night after said pedestrians have had a few.
Just to add: in italy there are already signs about this topic. The Movein blackbox that controls how much km you do in your old car in exchange for a slight discount on the insurance and limits you to 9k km then you will get fined. Also on the south of italy insurance companies started to negate insurance for 20yo cars (which are partially historical here).
Very interesting couple of videos, thanks. This splits into two areas, Control (which at present remains largely untested because so few cars are actually controlled), and Monitoring, which is almost certain to happen if technology continues to develop.
Im pretty tired of loosing autonomy to risk mitigation. Life is inherently dangerous and taking freedoms away in the name of safety leads only to one place. Dystopia is already here lol
Agree people are becoming very risk averse. Obviously we have to be sensible and safe on the roads but I don’t want loads more cameras and rules everywhere and I don’t understand why people are so accepting of them in general.
@@callummunro5400 I drove down to Cardiff last Saturday, clear weather, above freezing and on the dual carriageways from Merthyr Tydfill to Cardiff it was incredible the number of people doing 45-50 mph. Now, there were a couple of sections with 50 limits near on-slips, but they were just... dozing. On the way back took in a small section through Herefordshire and the (A-road!) A4111 had some bends, but got stuck behind TWO cars (about 1/4 mile apart but visibly going the same speed - 30. 30MPH on a (yes single-carriage, and with some bends) main A-road.... I understand caution, I don't see the need to speed for the sake of it, but the general standard of sheer inability to drive with conditions, to a sensible standard of making progress, is getting beyond comprehension.
@@callummunro5400 Do know anyone who has asked for these things well anyone with rational thought that is! we are governed by big tech and big business I saw this coming about 20 years ago and its been creeping ever since. Boiling frogs I believe is the term often used doesn't sound like a conspiracy theory now, every day seems to bring more,
This Guru's assertion that EU directives don't apply to UK as we are no longer in the EU is a red herring. The UK car market is far too small for manufacturers to produce UK-only cars. That's why Euro 5 emissions rules still apply to any new car you buy in UK today, as will Euro 6, 7, 8 etc etc.
Not quite, we have a transition period,then UK law has to be enacted. In relation to emissions, It is not the same, as we have agreed to these as part of Global agreements,which are outside of EU directives. EU Law categorically does not apply in the UK any longer.The EU does not need to manufacture UK specific cars, as the requirements are identical
@@gzk6nk Your assertion that no one will produce UK-only cars because the market is far to small is erroneous. Foreign auto manufacturers have been producing (Australian Design Rule [ADR] ) cars for the Australian market for many years - a car market that is siginficantly smaller than the UK.
No-one told the cretins who voted for Brexit. Not that they would have listened, they're proud that they never learn from people who know more than them and their small-minded prejudices.
Too many variables to be totally autonomous imo. Not only that the current UK road network is an absolute mess. Current vehicle sensors in cars are shocking. Handful of times now I've been driving work vehicles on the motorway and the brakes slam on for no reason. Very dangerous.
Personally, I'm not reassured at all; it's the classic balance between "rights" versus "freedoms." In other words, how much risk are you willing to accept to preserve your freedoms? Of course, today these decisions are largely taken out of our hands and governments inevitably opt for more control, as and when new technologies become available. Not to mention the potential for these new technologies to go horribly wrong or to be hacked by "bad actors." Great interview, Jack.
Freedom to kill people by driving drunk? Freedom to kill people while texting on your phone? You may not do these things but there are thousands out there who do.
I think that given the fact insurance companies leverage the usage of a black box for young drivers against premiums that aren't financially ruinous, how long before they demand that people do share that data (that can be bypassed GDPR with explicit consent) in return for premiums they can afford. Manufacturers may not want to work with insurance companies but they're not the ones underwriting the policy. I don't want to get all grassy knoll but insurance companies have the power to let you drive legally or not so why would they not demand you consent to their data harvesting requirements.
I'm not worried about you driving your classic car carefully on a Sunday, I'm worried about the thousands of inattentive people nominally "in control" of a couple of tonnes travelling at 80 or 90 MPH for tens of thousands of miles a year.
I had concerns when the 1st video went live. It felt like there was more to this and this sort of thing was maybe not quite missinformation but certainly missing a level of detail. Very glad you posted this follow up with a balanced view and more explaination. That Guru guy seems quite level headed.
Well, I was trying to be polite as I like Jack’s content normally. The 1st vid was pretty click baity. Benefit of the doubt n all that but I just saw the insta promotion for this vid and that is blatant click bait.
Here in Canada, we have amber alerts for missing children and other situations. Possibly, if a person is suspected to be operating the vehicle in question then it could be shut down. The same might apply to a stolen vehicle. On a positive if it is known that a person has several DUI charges and has a suspended licence and no insurance and continues to drive the vehicle it could be immobilized. But we know that the police and insurance companies don't make mistakes. Unlike the movie Brazil. Also insurance companies use different standards than the traffic laws. So you may be in a situation where you were not charged in a collision or for excess speed, they may increase your premium regardless. And one is not open to defence, unlike in court. And you won't get far taking an insurance company to court. And the manufacturers will be reluctant to market cars made too difficult to insure.
The insurance companies keep promising cheaper insurance if you let them install one of these monitoring systems in your car. Well one couple did so. Then one day they had to suddenly stop because a kid ran into the middle of the street. The next month the insurance company bumped up their insurance premium by 20% for 'risky driving behavior ', and ignored the parent's justification. Proof that the insurance companies want these monitoring systems installed purely to fish for excuses to charge more money and blame you for it.
@@noseboop4354 Rubbish - Both my kids had these boxes. The situation you described does not happen. There would be several warnings before such a change would occur. there must have been many instances of "children running into the road". My daughter was rear ended at a roundabout and the telemetry from the black box proved she had come to a stop before she was shunted into the car in front, disproving the van driver's claims he had driven into a pile-up, saving my daughter from loss of no-claims and an insurance increase.
You have 💯% called for drinking their Cool Aid. If, maybe, possibly. Don't fall into their trap - exercise your own mind and don't live in fear of miniscule chances that will impossible ridiculous circumstances on the majority of ppl who are doing no harm
Good job we are in a free country 😅, its scary how much personal information companies have and how the hell do they get it! ...... Excellent stuff as always Jack buddy 👍
One act of parliament like " online harms" is all is needed to change who and how car data is handled. Read how nefarious online harms bill actually is little to do with protecting children. Built in software backdoor for governments to do whatever they like.
I worked at HPE on a project where we tried to help lease companies and car companies to add value and possibly monetise data from vehicles to give very high resolution detail of driving conditions. The platform was able to take this data and make it anonymous and then allow other companies purchase the data to add value using it. Consider all of the data a modern car collects, for example the wipers are on, the headlights are on, the traction control has activated several times and the very local outside temperature is very low. This data could be used to warn other drivers of low visibility and a risk of black ice or poor traction. There is so much value that can be obtained from connected vehicles but it is SO important that this must be controled and not abused. Our platform provided that capability.
How does this technology fit in with a social credit score? … I’m sure if you had float the idea of a lock down to an expert in 2019 they’d of said it could never happen
In a Western world of democracy, the social credit score should never occur, if you are in a communistic society, with absolute control over everything in your life.
Plain and simple, insurance companies and carmakers better figure out how to offer the "driver self insured Flintstones package and the ai driven corporate insured jetson package. I simply refuse to insure, "steer-by-wire","throttle-by-wire","brake-by-wire","e-brake-by-wire","transmission engagement-by-wire","clutch-by-wire", as that is a vehicle control system im never truly driving. If the government and auto manufacturers insist on giving everyone a car they are never really driving and they trust their own tech so much then they should be responsible for insuring it. Plain and simple, i will never buy a new car just because of how they are building them. Im proud to be a Flintstone and im proud to insure my own real driving.
I work in manufacturing, autonomous and interconnection is good when everything works but the day it fails it can be catastrophic and fatal, now you can imagine it on the motorway and things go south.
You're still invading ppls privacy & forcing ppl to give up their freedom. You will kill the freedom to get in your car & go anywhere at anytime in anyway. I own & daily drive 80s cars, no black box or any tech crap to monitor me will go in any of my Cars.
Interesting video, aligns with views of a lot of people I've interviewed at various OEMs. Suspect it'll be cost of fuel which will be a nail in the coffin for a lot of older cars, sadly.
EVs will rely on a failing grid with unreliable energy. Not just hydrocarbons are going to increase mobility costs. Bottom line 'they' want the end of private mobility.
Some older cars (particularly non-carburated) are just as efficient as modern cars, and with a few modifications can be more efficient than modern, heavier, cars. They will never be safer (unless a rollcage is welded in, then they're MUCH safer) but they can be made more fuel efficient quite trivially. Actually the biggest thing holding them back is the legality of removing the original car engine computer and replacing it with a modern one.
@@cannaroe1213 If fuel prices increase significantly, which is likely if there's considerably less demand, the majority of people aren't going to spend money to make older cars marginally more efficient. Governments are pushing EVs; if this continues the automotive landscape will change considerably over the next decade. Not sure what country you're in so can't comment on legality of removing an ECU wherever you are, but there's nothing in the legislation here in the UK - you can run whatever engine management system you want. It still won't help older cars much if fuel is considerably more expensive than electric.
@@philthewriterI'm from UK but live in Germany - UK and other english-speaking countries are unusually permissive about modifying cars, I didn't realise until I left. In most of Europe you can't install eBay parts from China, they have to be EU certified, which means if they don't make it for your year and model (like LED headlights on a VW T4) a'int nothing you can do about it, there's no legal way to get it. Some countries like Germany go a step further and say you have to have them installed by a registered mechanic (not lightbulbs, but they'll treat any engine mod like open heart surgery) and once they've finished, if it affects the emissions, the exhaust gasses have to be tested (€3000) and if you fail you dont get your money back or 50% off your next test. It's another 3K. For this reason only the rich modify their cars here. ECU swap requires the emissions test, so no one does it. Also I think in UK you cant have an ECU that can be reprogrammed in the car (to bypass emissions/performance tradeoffs), the cops will seize your car for possibility of rolling coal. Not in Alabama, the Lord's chosen people.
i really don't know how people can look at these subjects and not see a super bleak 1984 or minority report type future. none of this is good for motorists. none of it.
It is not indeed, I can take you down many a rabbit hole.. you need to research FCA fines on supermarkets selling your data, then buying the companies that they sold the data too, now making supermarkets £125 million... one of the industries that buys the data are insurers for heath insurance
Mmm. Can't say that my mind has been put at ease by anything discussed. I got the impression that this was a damage limitations exercise for the insurance expert. I still think we need to be concerned about this. Just in case it turns out to be true, which I have a horrible feeling that it will.
Clearly says in the video he is not in the corner of insurance companies.. he fights them for a living, and as you say what he says is not exactly reassuring!
It is definitely not "damage limitation", I am no fan of insurers, and I pretty much despise all of the "future of motoring , ADAS, V2X, peer to peer networking, " , What I wanted to do is present "Facts" @@matthewgodwin3050 you do need to be concerned, just not quite yet,
Anyone who has the slightest understanding of what is happening internationally will realise that the whistleblower letter is totally legitimate. Anything that can be done in the field of surveillance and control is being done or will be done as soon as technology is ready for prime time. I am shocked at how very few people seem to have any idea of what the UN is doing, and all it’s subsidiaries, such as WHO, IPCC, UNESCO etc. It makes me realise that we are sitting ducks because “*normies” simply refuse to believe that the world is not at all as they thought it was. That is a horrible moment, when the penny drops, and you realise it’s all connected and you’ve been living in The Truman Show for most to all of your lives. (*this term is soon going to be as belittling as “conspiracy theorists” now is. The latter have largely been correct but not heard).
I suspect the if people are politically exposed, such as the many people involved in politics who have had banking issues in recent years, private companies could choose to withdraw services such as EV charging, so perhaps that might be a more likely way of limiting someone's use of a car.
If the car is fully automated and does all of the driving / maneuvers and "knows" what the other vehicles are doing then aside from theft then there shouldn't be no need for insurance, should there?
With respect, this insurance expert isn’t operating at executive & policy level. If he was, he’d be aware of the role of the UN2030 sustainable development goals, not the ostensible reasons but the real reasons for constraints. The elites have agreed with all our governments to deprive us of private transportation. Sorry, but that’s been agreed. It’s not democratic but then again we’ve not been In democratic systems for half a century or more. Argue if you think it’ll help.
The fact he can create a business fighting insurance companies on behalf of the (supposedly) insured just further reinforces my choice to never have anything to do with insurers in any situation in which I can possibly avoid it.
These sensors may be on the cars now but they are currently rubbish...my crash avoidance system is so random that i simply don't trust it so I turn it off. These systems need to massively improve before they can be trusted in every occasion. I think this guy is missing a few issues. The kill switch could be linked to your green social score so imagine youve done too many miles, the car could refuse to start... nothing to do with insurance. Also, this assumes you own the car, what if this is all written into your hire agreement?..you can rent the car but agree to the insurance/ car/government dept. remotely controlling your usage??
Interesting exchange on a few oddball and serious questions but I think there was one huge thing that was ignored in the discussion. It largely revolved about the data security of the individual in terms of what an insurance company may or may not gain about the vehicle and “ Passenger” I don’t think going forward we need to talk about a “driver” being insured. This leads me to the elephant in the discussion - that we will not need to own a personal vehicle. You will request a car on an app - say -Uber - for a car - it will arrive at the time requested to your location - the hirer /“passenger” “ will use it as they require, return to a destination anywhere any time - the cost being deducted per mile from your credit card - job done!!!!
Yes, this will be a massive bonus for people with mobility problems, for anyone wanting to get home after a session at the pub and so on. Another benefit that is not mentioned is that streets will no longer be littered with parked cars sitting there 90% of their lives waiting for their owners to need to used them. Not to mention the bonus for the thousands of people who suffer life-changing injuries in "accidents" caused by inattentive drivers.
Surely if you are the only person insured to drive that car they can identify you. And they can identify your car - if it's speeding for instance. Surely more and more cars will be on cloned plates too - 'unconnected' cars that is. You need to change 'revel' to 'reveal' btw.
The example that you have provided has been in play for over 30 years. If a speed camera records that my car has sped by, then I will receive the fine in the mail - irrespective of who was actually driving the car.
Simple. Number plates are an anachronism, soon even "unconnected" cars will be required to have some sort of transponder that announces what they are and any vehicle without one will stand out like a sore thumb to the less stupid version of ANPR ("What? You used cameras to read the characters on numbers plates?" 🤣) which will come with them.
I am sure you are correct. Although I imagine there will be plenty of ways to cheat it. A major issue these days is people not registering their cars when they buy them, which also means no tax or insurance.@@TonyWhitley
Great vid Tim.....This needs capping / governing by the government as they did with energy costs. Insurance companies are greedy bastards theres no doubt. Lets face it they can have their cake and eat it as car insurance is compulsory by law. For example Admiral made £234 million profit in the first 6 months of 2023. A percentage of this profit should be injected back into insurance policies in order to reduce premiums for drivers. I agree that newer, more complex vehicles are becoming more specialist to repair but what about older cars ? There are now families out there living on the bread line that are giving up their 20 year old vehicles as they cant afford to run them. They need to drive to work, collect kids from school, do their weekly shop and now they can't. I think we are going to see a MASSIVE increase in uninsured vehicles on our roads from now on
The first death(s) caused by autonomous car(s) will be an interesting insurance claim. Lots of this stuff is decades away even if it happens. I'll be 6ft under by then. Good luck
Thanks to Tesla and others beta testing their 'self driving' software on public roads, there have already been deaths due to autonomous cars. The companies involved will claim the driver was supposed to be supervising, but they've engineered the distracted driving in.
There has been a number of reported cases of autonomous vehicles causing accidents that involved a fatality - so it has already occurred. However I have no knoweledge of the associated insurance claims - would be interesting.
It's good to know that the Ins. companies won't lobby the govt. for access to all info provided by 'smart cars', or pass legislation requiring all licensed vehicles and drivers to carry 'full info' tracking devices when operating on public highways. Yep, govts. are totally against the "for your safety, comrade" concept.
An excellent video Jack. So I can be driving round in my non connected car enjoying life but be grassed up by a team of Tesslas. How depressing. Car fanatics really are on borrowed time.
15:28 potentially if the autonomous vehicle had to decide between two people to crash into, the one with higher bone density may experience less injury from being run over. this could be nonsense because im not a doctor.
Very interesting discussion Jack. As your guest said, much of the technology is here already and deployed but next step however is connecting this technology together and that worries me. It’s not so much the privacy issue, but more than reliability of the tech that we are putting so much faith into, it’s already proved with self driving not to be as reliable as we were told, what happens when we’ve got devices talking to other devices without human intervention? There must be millions of lines of code in most cars these days, what’s to stop external actors building in ways to control these devices (they stopped being cars, long ago)?
I think the self driving cars in the US came too early. Those tech companies/new car companies are all in a rush to develop the best self driving vehicle software in the world to allow Level 4 and Level 5 driving. For that they need real life data of how their vehicles are reacting. There is an absence of any guilt for those who died in car accidents involving self driving vehicles.
How many millions of lines of code do you think there are in a phone that you rely on every day? I've written some of them and spent several years making sure "external actors" couldn't (easily) take control of them.
If the new proposals by the DoT are made law in the UK then the law will mandate that the Government (or manufacture, on their behalf) MUST be able to take control of those devices, and modifications to prevent that would be illegal.
The end game! We loose and you might have to put your car in the garage and a window in your living room so you can still see it and remember how it used to be when you could afford it!
Regarding GDPR, the data can only be anonymised by default, but you CAN grant permission for your data to be identifiable. If you can only get insurance if you grant permission, the current GDPR protection is completely eliminated. It's one step away.
As long as there are rich and somewhat powerful people owning classic cars, I really don't see it happening. Wishful thinking perhaps because the EU has already destroyed so much... Fingers crossed. Thanks for the video and best wishes for the New Year from the Netherlands
@@sebastiend.5335this is fa to do with the eu as someone pointed out eu law offers protection our government wants to scrap. Now we’re out we have less influence and have to accept exactly what the (Chinese) manufacturers decide about cars. A few rich cc owners can’t do anything.
John Deer, the farming equipment manufacture in America, has and does use, the telematic system to switch off equipment if payments are not paid. Usually happens when vehicle is parked up, and will now not start. Bricked is the term used.
Very good video, these insurance "queries" seem to me to be really intrusive. The character John Malkovich plays in Red and Red 2 being determined to be off grid is a fine example. This noseyness is frightening. I think all the political parties will do the same thing, nothing. I do think though older cars are controlled by the driver and we should all be wise to remember that. Very interesting video Jack. Best wishes. Ben 🇬🇧🇮🇹🚌🚐
I drive older cars and find insurance cost fall once the car hits 20 years old. I pay £142 fully comp on a model year 2000 Peugeot 406 coupe 2.9 litre, that's with a regular insurance company the Halifax via a price comparison website.
To be fair I think he did debunk the content of the letter and there isn't anything he said here that isn't an obvious development for the future. In fact much of the technology is already in existence today. GDPR [provided it stays] will prevent non anonymised data going between parties.
@@Number27 Completely agree but then look at how personal surveillance has increased over the past 25 years. Everything we do is tracked/monitored. I'm a secondary school teacher and the level of data collection we do on the kids from the moment they're born is staggering. Nobody has the time to do anything with it but it's there. And that's only one small part of the surveillance landscape. Fast forward 10-20 years and our movements in cars will be the least of our worries !
@@jameshoward2738 Maybe but all that's capable of right now is finding/sifting/organising/re-presenting. There still won't be the time to do anything with it as most of it is useless. It's like collecting, keeping and organising household trash. You could get huge amounts of information from it - it could help in solving crime etc... but its relevance is very limited.
Road Pricing - if the vehicle is reporting where it is then they won't even need cameras. Your car will say to the privatised roads companies exactly how much to take from you. Anyone else expecting local councils to start selling roads to privatised businesses who want to charge us to drive on our local roads? Tories out. They take from us all to give to the rich, and they've done this for over 200 years.
15 years ago I was working in a Government Department where there were discussions going on about “black box” technology in hire cars used by staff. The concern from staff representatives was staff privacy and obviously the official side’s view was safety and control. In the end it was an accepted (begrudging) safety measure. The headline figures used in the final discussions were speeding figures picked up from users’ black boxes…. Max speed on M4, by a Civil Servant: 104mph Max speed throughout the department, a military officer: 114mph “l was late for an important meeting” was the excuse. I now get almost all of my fun on the water under power or sail. Jack, you should try it 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Always thought they will get people out of cars with insurance hikes , still so many foreign friends 36:07 driving old cars with no insurance or license
If the insurers were worried about Classic cars not complying then they would already have penalised cars which are not subject to an MOT. Am I missing the point here ?
Stick with car videos, Jack, and don't worry yourself about "leaked" letters. The UK car insurance industry is different to Germany, and Germany is different to Italy etc etc. What may or may not apply there will not necessarily apply in the UK, as far as insurance on classic cars goes in the future, based on your "experts" theory of interconnected autonomous cars, they surely will not require insurance, who would be the insured??? which means the only market will be you and your Pantera 😉. More Pantera, please, theirs already enough doom and gloom, we need you to let your enthusiasm shine through the darkness
In the future, the goverment will be the "insurance company" - Here in the US we're already seeing this for property insurance... Even now, private auto insurance companies offer deivces that plug into your vehicle's OB2 port to monitor driving behavior in order to earn a discount, but what will prevent them from requiring it (or contectivity via cell phone app while driving) to obtain and hold a policy in the future? Answer: only a matter of when, not if.
America has a road death problem and also a deeper issue with authority. You don't trust your system or the state. For good or bad that is part of your culture. Even getting a speeding ticket is seen as corrupt police and should be fought. Where I think this model falls apart is not every country is modelled on America as you hold onto certain things as a form of false history. You measure in miles inches and you have a 2nd amendment as though there can be no further amendments. Setting up a company or paying tax is one of the most challenging things you can do. Car insurance in America is high because you can sue for a high amount irrespective of my own earning. As you say there is a deep financial motivation to find fault with a 3rd party, not because of fault, but potential income. It's no good taking you to court if you only have an income.
The ability to remotely turn off a vehicle exists and has been used for a few years now a farmer friends tractor or combine refused to start it was almost new he contacted the main dealer to be told he had missed two payments so they had disabled it
But that's the manufacturer, not an insurance company, and the owner may have that "feature" written into their contract. Always read the small (and big!) print.
My Insurers are so crooked that they now ask if you have reversing sensors to make reversing safer and then charge you extra in case they get damaged in an accident. I rejected a car with sensors and bought one with no sensors and saved almost £60 off my insurance. Same car just no sensors. I will not be renewing with them next time round.
As long as I can remember, I've always thought that people of the future will think it crazy that people of our time were allowed to operate motor vehicles on public roads at high speeds and be completely free to go any speed at any time, and crash into anything we like, as hard as we like.
Where I live, I'm not at liberty to drive at any speed any time, crash into anything I like and as hard as i like. What country provides such freedoms?
Hopefully those people of the future will wonder why in the hell animals are given so much liberty while they are caged like criminals from birth, to keep them "safe".
I've not news for you. The ability to remotely take control of your car has been around for well over 20 years. I was helping my neighbour move a car away from debt collectors posing as bailiffs, who had come to collect it. I won't bore you with the details (long story), but suffice to say that as I started to drive it away, this "bailiff" pressed a button on something in his hand, which instantly cut out the car and I wasn't able to restart it. I've since discovered that what they did, whatever device they used at that time, was illegal but the fact that it was even possible at that time shocked me nonetheless. The car? Not the latest model, not a 2020 car, not even a 2010 car, but a year 2000 VW Passat. All of this will happen, the speed camera example was a good one but again you can go back a lot further than that - seatbelts were never intended to be mandatory. And they'll get away with it too, because like everything else they will play the health and safety card making it near impossible for the public to object to it and making those who do appear to be reckless individuals who don't care about other people's safety.
..has always seemed a paradoxical prescription for a market economy. None of the Davos lot will have an income, just plummeting asset values. Great wealth depends on trickle-up.
To sum up: The semblance of a democratic society is well and truly dead. Parliament is truly sovereign, even though it also gives that sovereignty away to 'higher' vested interests. We don't elect people to represent us and protect us; we merely elect the people from an approved list who enact more and more laws against us in order to protect the state from us. As a collective of individual citizens, the state is not there to facilitate our individual potential and protect our rights and freedoms, but rather the individual citizen is an enemy of the state, against whom the state needs to protect itself. Instead of the state existing solely to serve and protect the supreme citizen collective; the state is supreme and individual citizens are merely there to serve the interests of the state. They will only have the opportunity to reach their full potential where that potential concides with or is determined by the state to fufil its needs. They will only prosper in the same context. AI will literally exercise the power of life and death millions of times a day. And, most importantly, let's not forget that a digital economy no longer needs anywhere near as many people to create wealth and create and support infrastructure. Moreover, according to current ideology/'science' as carbon lifeforms we are a threat to ourselves and the planet, and even our existing numbers are unsustainable. Basically, the majority threatens the minority elite, and needs to be controlled and/or culled. AI 'lifeforms' don't need to be educated, don't require healthcare, don't need housing or food, don't need need rest, or require recreation. You are not only no longer needed, you are a threat. Of course, the 'science' isn't reality, but is a pretext to creating a reality in which you are the problem not the solution. Cars will no longer primarily be the means to exercising freedom of movement and facilitating socio-economic mobility, but the greatest means of spying and snitching, not only on our fellow citizens but on ourselves.
Like you, I'm also averse to conspiracy theories. But this is something I think we need to take seriously untill we are sure it's a real possibility or not. I don't want it to be true, and I hope it isn't proven so. However, it has a very uncomfortable ring of truth to it. Let's hope I'm wrong, because the potential repercussions are terrifying.
Basically the car manufactory has made a product that is a ball of scrap to fix ...iv been in the motor trade for 40 years and its the worst its ever been ... you have key board engineers that are clueless . and will write your car off at a flash just by looking at pictures ....
Insurance companies may not have access to your vehicle’s data under current protection legislation but when autonomous cars become available, I suspect the state may well insure them on the basis that no individual will be paying a premium to an insurance company for a vehicle they don’t and can’t drive. Then all your data linked via the car will be accessed by the state for any purpose they choose
Switching off a car remotely has already happened I'm afraid, a news story in America just before Christmas where a car was stolen and reported to the Police who ended the pursuit by remotely deactivating the vehicle, no mention of the vehicle manufacturer or how it was done but this technology is already here 😮
@@andrewmullen4003 And that's how they get you. Infringements on our rights always begin with the argument that it's necessary to stop the most reprehensible in society, but once the wedge is in the door, the "exception use case" becomes both extensive and routine. Witness the use of RIPA powers here, which were initially justified to fight terrorism, but almost immediately were used to spy on the innocent, for no other reason than because the law allowed it now.
I have a few cars and None are newer than 2008 , no telemetry for me thank you 😂. About 7 years ago I was given a 2014 jaguar Xf to use as a replacement while my own was being repaired, fortunately it was my friend who arranged it through his company and after a few weeks he called me to let me know he’d deleted the tracking info showing how fast I’d been travelling up the m6 … 😳 and asked me to “ keep it down “ 😂😂😂 The police already use our ring doorbell from Amazon without our authority
What if one could insure oneself from getting hit by these cars. They'd have to choose between hitting this highly insured person vs these two with no such insurance... what a lovely future
In some ways I get how this Big Brothering would be beneficial, in principle .. The Geofence idea -- if it was not abused -- would be a fantastic way of promoting safety of certain areas .. However, I still maintain that insurance companies are 100% there to (a) take as much money from people as they can and (b) pay out as little money as they possible can .. So thinking of their intentions as benevolent in any way is something I just can't do
Geofencing is very frightening. Any restriction of customary freedoms is like that & we must push back against these. There is an elite, shadowy group who are the real power in the world. Their interests and ours have until recently been coincident or at least overlapping. No longer. Our owners have determined that they no longer need us, for anything. The implications are I hope obvious.
The path to 1984 won't be quite as straightforward as some people wish or believe it will be. It has been happening for many years though. Our government has compromised our privacy already without us even knowing. Today, you can apply for a passport and the photograph from your driving licence can be automatically used, so there is one link few people think about because it's convenient for them. Your health records are digitised, every time you visit your GP with a sniffle, or perhaps an alcohol problem, that data is recorded. Unlike the commercial rivalry between insurance companies and manufacturers there is no rivalry between government departments sharing your data to achieve their objectives. The problem, as I see it, isn't with manufacturers and insurers, it's with governments compelling them to hand over data on you either routinely or ad hoc e.g. in the event of a crash or a criminal event. Who, for example, will control the infrastructure to run fully autonomous vehicles? Will manufacturers or insurers do that? Unlikely as it would be a bun fight to profit from it. It's likely to be controlled by governments who are known for their technical illiteracy and utter incompetence. Look what happened to the integrated NHS database billions were wasted on, and the Inland Revenue database more billions were wasted on. Then there's the cost. Who will shoulder the burden of implementing a nationwide autonomous network, and how will that work in the north of Scotland where cellphone coverage is patchy at best even now? Now convince me that autonomous cars will work across inhospitable parts of Russia, Africa and the Americas. The public will of course be expected to pay for it but with ballooning national debts the expense will be harder to justify as time goes on when growing numbers of people are sleeping rough and overall poverty is rising, especially amongst the elderly. Then there's the simple problem of powering all this from dwindling fossil fuel reliance. We know we are facing problems with renewable energy. If we keep going on the path we are on (we won't) we will face electricity rationing. So what is shut down first? The Heat Pumps people rely on to keep body and soul together, or maintaining an autonomous transport system? I suspect our government, in its infinite stupidity, would favour the latter, but that would only last so long. The fact is, as Casey Stoner once said to Valentino Rossi (paraphrasing) 'Your ambition got the better of your ability'. Our technocracy is like a child. We have only had it widely available for 40 years or so. Our industrial revolution has taken 250+ years to mature. I remember being assured that TV aerials on our roofs were the devils spawn and the means of mind control. We have gone from A Sinclair computer very few people understood to a laptop in every home, each of which with more computing power than required to send a man to the moon, and the majority of users browse the internet and watch TicToc videos. The technical and digital possibilities are endless, and that's its Achilles heel. Everyone want's a slice of the digital pie but, at the end of the day it doesn't come down to Orwell's political vision of the world, it comes down to the energy we have available to power it.
But not every country is as corrupt as Britain. The main thrust of this is car insurance, at the moment in Britain and I include Scotland in with this your car insurance is graded on your own claims history and those around you. Theft is one of the higher costs in the UK, tell the Plumber I am going on Holiday next week and he will rob your house. But then he has a sign on the back telling you he has no tools inside overnight and we all meet the same guy at the pub to buy it off. Uninsured drivers are also a cost. Every Brit loves to tell you their no claims bonus years. I loved Brexit as it now has turned a mirror on the British as they always blame Johnny foreigner on why things are bad. To your point about digital capture laws I think the idea that Jeff Bezos, Musk and the world economic forum are taking over, well the reality of having everything farmed out to 3rd party companies only works if they had not been so greedy. Even now if Jack here does a video of a car review and I am in it I can get Google to remove the video or blur me out. No cost to me and a great inconvenience to Jack. Even him having a product in the video requires a statement saying he has a paid promotion. Why? As other people screwed it up. Yes there will always be a legal basis for using things, how the UK and Scotland implement these is up to them. This discussion isn't happening in other European countries and I don't see it happening any time soon as putting a very expensive tracker in every car is a lot more expensive than policing and prosecuting correctly. Asking your MP or Government to change a law is only the cost of the people writing it.
We call handing people envelopes stuffed full of money corruption in the UK. The Chinese consider it sensible business and it's been a tradition at their New Year for much longer than I have been alive. You have just been told by the industry expert on this video what's going on has little to do with insurance companies. But somehow you know better than him. Do you have any evidence that demonstrates theft is one of the higher cost's in the UK? We had builders, including plumbers in our house for 5 months, including 2 weeks when we went on holiday. Nothing stolen. Yo are making all this nonsense up. The facts are that Britain is at lest no worse off than before Brexit and, compared to Europe, in many cases a lot better. The only reason we're not doing better is because government 'Remainers' have not implemented much of what they could have, including ditching the ECHR which ensures the boatloads of illegal immigrants can't be deported. You don't surely think the post Brexit channel hoppers were a coincidence do you? It's an act of revenge for daring to challenge the mighty EU which is now falling apart. Meloni, Le Penn, Farage etc. now more popular figures than ever. Donald Tusk installed in Poland by the EU. Whoever heard of a coalition of minority parties with no common ground whatsoever being formed in a rush before an election. Democracy demands parties stand alone and if a coalition is to be formed it's following the election. Just another EU stitch up. Why do you claim Bezos and Musk are greedy? They developed goods and services the public demands and became wealthy. That's free market capitalism. It means you can get just as rich if you work as hard as them. Where's the evidence either Bezos or Musk are participants in the WEF? A favourite trick of the WEF is to feature a photograph and a description of notable politicians and businessmen on their website. It's factual but it does not indicate they have anything meaningful to do with the organisation. Visit Robert McCulloch's website and you'll find a database of Young Global leaders over decades. It's most notable for who isn't included than for who is. BTW, the term is 'The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland'. Scotland isn't some sort of addition, it's an integral part. There is little objection from the EU over autonomous vehicles because, in case you hadn't noticed, the EU is an authoritarian entity which doesn't tolerate criticism. As in the UK the media is owned, influenced or coerced by Brussels. @@fraserwright9482
The buses have front and rear traffic cameras to record any incidents, not facial recognition. They picked up his van on video, and that's why the police now ask for any dash cam film around any incident areas. We are big brother!!!!
Please stop this stupidity. The insurance industry is not going to sacrifice 80% of its income until you buy a connected car. Yes you can see that there will be some accident avoidance but set against the higher values of new cars and the high cost of repair due to technology, this is not a 'coming soon' feature. By the way, I have only 40 years experience in the insurance industry at a senior level and I have never worked for an insurer. Get back to the classic car reviews
@@motorclaimguru watched in full, I think is not relevant for this channel and too negative, that is not the attitude of Jack, then he look to be in paranoia, for this letter found, amd seems you did not reassured him enoght
Salient point of the video: 31:42 - "Insurance is based on risk" In a connected car, I expect premiums go down when I drive in "low risk" areas in a "low risk" way, just as it currently is today. Right now, a mature driver in an classic car living out of the city has lower premiums than a 25yr old driving a sporty hot-hatch living in the city. No extra data needed, just your post code, your age, and your VIN. Connected cars will give the insurance industry more data to charge more competitive premiums for high vs. low risk drivers. The bit I hadn't considered that the video brought up, was that "connected" cars on the road would also be able to assess risk of other cars on the road. Even if you decide to opt-out of a connected car, everyone else's car will have seen what happened, and will know how you drive. At that point, data-sharing contracts between manufacturers/insurance companies become a valuable commodity. I hope that becomes a line item on the purchase agreement. As for conspiracy-theory stuff about the government shutting down your car, just ignore it - if you're up against a nation-state-level security agency, you've already lost. Why bother hacking into your car when it's just as easy to insert a device to cut your brake lines, or simply abduct you in the middle of the night with a swat team?
Isn't it wonderful to have someone on here who's an expert and knows what he's talking about. As opposed to a load of RUclips influencers that have opinions and thrive on rumour and miss information.. As the man said a load of bollox.😂😂
You obviously don't understand the implications & how just one emergency crisis can flip everything on its head. COVID pandemic was a great example of how laws/regulations were later abused many years after passed. The mechanisms for fixing those abuses is so slow that they have almost no impact in negating or stopping the harms before the govt has utterly screwed you & made you submit to their tyranny. The freedom to move about is one of the most foundational freedoms in a free society. As technology evolves, the integration of the data your car collects about you into a social credit score, used to freeze your bank account, prevent you escaping the country unjustly persecuting you (by shutting off your car; look how they pressured social media to give them direct access for blocking & censoring people from speaking claiming their speech was a threat to public health, etc - they could apply similar pressure to auto manufacturers to give them access into their systems to shutdown your car; look at FISA courts (w/o ability to address the charges against you) which in the US have shown they essentially rubber stamp the gov't request to spy on Americans).
In order for this to happen in the US the government would have to change the definition of what is an automobile. If they were to try to push this agenda without doing so then they would need to get rid of the law mandating the insurance.
There's only ever one registered keeper - it's more a case of who is insured to drive the vehicle. And a business is likely to have a fleet manager who's the registered keeper of all their vehicles.
the breathaliser thing has been used here in the states for probably going on 20 years for the very reason your insurance guru pal suggested, to allow those who have been convicted of drunk driving to commute to work etc. etc.
Let's face it... if you are using a smartphone there is no problem in tracking you now. Will you stop using your smartphone? And personally I think it is rather good if a, for example, drunken person is not allowed to start their car (or motorcycle).
Fool. What percentage of the world population are drunken drivers? Come on, it's not even measurable. You're proposing that the masses are put under total surveillance for an absolute minority. They sure have got your mind programmed
Any time they want you stop doing or owning something, they will just make it so expensive to do so that you “choose” to give it up. If you own a classic car worth millions then you will pay 100k to insure it. If you own a 20k capri you’ll just give it up. This is happing with houses too. It will probably seperate the wheat from the chaff as far as which cars are saved and which cars are scrapped. This to me is very sad as beauty is in the eye of the beholder and there a 1000 ‘s of models of cars which are joyful to own.
There will always be insurance companies that will undercut the giants if they try this tack, believe me. If there isn't a genuine risk, there will always be one insurance company that will buck the trend to get the trade. Same with house prices. People have tried to ride the price rise train and hike their prices up in the wake of COVID, but many areas are now seeing prices dropping, because people vote with their feet and go and buy a house somewhere else that's in their price bracket. Meanwhile, when this inverse trend is reported, people race to sell their house before the price drops too much, causing a glut in the market and lowering prices still faster. Basic market trends.
I really am not generally one for 'conspiracy' theories and really tried to find a balanced and informed view point for this video.. but am really starting to wonder if all this technology is leaving us very vulnerable. I do NOT think this is a concerted, conjoined effort to control us but it seems we ourselves are laying the foundations for someone to misuse that technology in the future. Legislation currently protects us to a degree but legislation can be changed. What do you think?
If you have, for example, Toyota insurance on your Toyota vehicle then there is a link there,at least in that case.
Things can get out of hand very quickly with conspiracy theories. Before you know it they are being stated as fact. We the public always need to keep ourselves informed of the legislation that is being proposed by our government whatever their colour. There is no point me saying 'I never watch the news' and then complaining about what legislation is brought in. That may sound obvious but I think Tim mentioned it in the video that we should look at who we vote into power and their policies. Aii very important in my opinion.
There's no big grand conspiracy and puppetmaster, but there's a creeping authoritarian mindset which is just as damaging. As you say we are creating tools that will be misused later. Not can, but will - because the kinds of people who would misuse them in a heartbeat are already pushing for them to exist.
Would never have a tracker on my car
I think We are lucky to live or to choose to live in a democratic country, the technology is there to control us already, I've mentioned in previous video comments that anything can happen in the future, but there would need to be big changes in the EU constitution, then we can just stop or vote for different people. I sincerely don't believe it is going to happen. Drive your car now! don't be trapped thinking about the future! (that don't exist) keep your joy of fixing a car or diving it. Please don't do video so bothering ,miss confusing and so negative also on the way is being presented ! This is not you in my opinion
My daughter took out a "Black Box" reduced price car insurance; however, she lives in a part of London with a blanket 20mph limit and was continually being tailgated, beeped, finger-flicked, etc, for sticking to the speed limit.
After 6 months, she got a letter from the insurance company saying that she would have to improve her driving due to frequent "speeding" at 22mph otherwise they would cancel her cover and refuse to insure her.
This would obviously give her a major problem when trying to renew with a different company so she just cancelled the policy and took the cancellation fees as a loss.
The black box is still wired into the car though and wasn't requested for return. We have taken a record of the IMEI number in case it is stolen and maybe that could be used to help trace it - but I have zero confidence that insurance companies or the police would be interested.
deserves her right for putting that crap into her car
@@strammerdetlef Insurance is very expensive for young people, so I cannot really blame her for trying to save some money
Will modifying a blackbox be illegal?
@@steve00alt70there is a way to get around it my mate is currently fleecing one .
Bstards
The claims guru has more faith in politicians than I do. The automation of cars is the thin end of the wedge just like central bank digital currency and health passports
You could not be further from the truth... I have no faith in our politicians, as for Central banking, digital currency, it is part of the WEF's Agenda
If you don't have full and total control of a car or anything for that matter then you don't own it!
I have no faith in politicians!lol.. just presenting the facts.
Thanks Jack for doing this video. Many salient points in the video and comments. For anyone who has worked on cars that are a few years old, modern sensors are a never ending source of frustration. Everything is built to a cost and fully integrated sensors will fail. There will be a time when the car is sending incorrect data that will affect your insurance premiums, refuse to start or move, or cause an accident. The end consumer who has no control will ultimately be finically responsible.
Excellent comment, but taking it further, the fault potential you mention could be instrumental in causing potentially life threatening situations when used in the V2X autonomous system. As an electronics/systems engineer, I would be very wary of trusting my life to the complex digital systems discussed here and I can’t see all these systems being designed to be fully fail safe. Such systems are never 100% glitch immune.
@@user-rf9me7xm1w Don't get me wrong here, I hate this Orwellian future we are marching toward, but I think a standard response to what you've said is, no matter how faulty the technology is, humans will always be worse. Sensors and computers can fail, but never at the rate of a distracted or drunk driver. I'm guessing this will be one of the arguments used to force this technology down our throats.
@@ProfessorOzone. You have no idea what you’re talking about. If a wire or a sensor fails that equals a stroke in a human, and the computer simply loses touch with reality. After that absolutely anything can happen. I’ve seen a lot of it in my commercial rigs and in passenger vehicles.
@@Stan-b3v Right. Humans are more dependable than machines. And I have no idea what I'M talking about. Ever heard of redundancy genius?
@@ProfessorOzone You ever repair electrical systems? Genius?
You may intellectually believe that the man versus computer control, is just a
‘Safety Issue’ , but if you’ve had to deal with the phenomenon you might realize that there is a lot more to it all.
Firstly they are extremely complex and therefore fail in unimagined ways. That causes a cascade of problems from excessive downtime to overrun shop facilities to reeducation needs for the technicians to reconfiguration of system hardware and software and so on.
Through all that you have removed all skills and abilities from the owners and operators leaving behind a fragile system that is a disaster already happening.
The government has pushed through with EV at a pace that every real domestic issue should have been tackled. The only reason is to push an agenda that asserts the government control over every aspect of our life. I understand this is about vehicles, vehicle types and insurance only the broader picture is how every aspect of our lives are controlled to the point we have no rights or freedoms thus heading to a bottlenecked existence under a dictatorship.
Thank you for the video. This is 1 of a dozen issues pointing to us being forced in the wrong direction.
EV by themselves have started showing how completely useless they are overall- Check any dealer that will repair your EV after you hit a pothole rendering your car a potential death trap. You you find any, it will be a write off. No body shop or service garage even have the equipment to deal with these issues that doesnt charge more than the value of a new vehicle. So how is this better for the environment and everyday people? No country has the infrastructure to support anything being forced on us with a target date of 2035.
Big Brother in our pay, jobs, PRIVATE (joke) bank accounts and cars. Next we will be forced to have BBC regardless so the government that already has the station will use it to monitor in our homes. Invest in the communities, give back the appearance of hope and the people will respond in a positive manner. Shackle everyone in hopes you brainwash a generation of brainwashed children to follow the new regime and end up with a Guy Fawkes. He knew better, very few listened.
A valuable topic to explore and well presented.
My take away is to avoid buying new vehicle, but to keep one that I can still control and maintain. Classics may enjoy a long life yet.
While I would like to agree with you, the controllers will simply restrict the provision of spare parts. For many manufacturers it’s already getting harder to obtain new spares for vehicles more than ten years old. For volume manufacturers, used spares will provide parts almost indefinitely.
Legal permission to use them is a different matter. Government will come up with lies to restrict older vehicles ostensibly on pollution grounds.
@@GT380man : Your last point is a good one. Government always ignores the fact that it is far more polluting to manufacture a brand new vehicle than it is to keep driving an existing vehicle.
His thesis seems to be, "Don't worry, they are not allowed to do that, and they wouldn't anyway."
Lol - I was born yesterday so I believe him completely.
Seriously, this guy seems to expect everyone to be as intentional obtuse as he is. These people are dangerous.
👍
This guru is working within the system. He therefore cannot see the bigger picture. I think the goal is up to 80% less cars on the road, all of the triggers for this are in place. EVs and the lack of infrastructure, the mot, the insurance costs, the salty roads , 15 mins cities. Whi owns all of these big companies that us also an important question.
@@jackcollins156Agree completely except I expect it to be an even bigger reduction. No private transport whatsoever. Lined up with UN2030 SGDs.
What most people don’t realise is that among the goals agreed decades ago is to reduce the population. Cairo Agreement iirc.
The means were not specified.
I now know one of them. Because it’s happened bang in my domain of professional expertise.
we talk dumb to get away with sayingwhat we say
Even when data is made "anonymous" it's still possible to connect it to a specific individual to it by putting multiple bits and pieces of information together.
* pieces.
It can be established with almost complete certainty in many cases as I understand it, even within a single supposedly anonymized dataset, when there is a lot to work with or the individual stands out in more than one way in the data.
Exactly as is done through information brokers with smartphones. Next time you're about to install an application on your smartphone look at the data it wants from you.
Yeah like your Medical records which they flogged a year ago. Worth billions a year
That's why they are investing heavily in A.I.
The closing thought from Tim about influencing this stuff through the ballot box was, perhaps, the most concerning. I can't see either of the main political parties in the UK advocating for the motorist, despite what they may say.
There's really only ONE party. Same in the 'states. Democracy has been an illusion for generations...... therefore you are spot on
They were both in favour of depriving us of our liberties for months for no reason whatsoever. They lied and are still lying about “pandemics”.
They both were willing to coerce injections into people not even notionally at risk. When was government ever genuinely interested in your wellbeing? That’ll be never.
Both favour digital ID which serves only the control agenda.
Both favour CBDCs.
We have to influence this with our dollars. Boycott everything that doesnt stand for what we want. Let’s fund a new insurance company that doesnt do all of this BS
Boycott like french farmers
Why in God's name are YOU - or indeed anyone - voting for LIB/LAB/CON, they are all left-leaning woke clubs?
Always do what you've always done and always get what you've always got!
Tim contacted me to try and 'debunk' some of this stuff after my video on the whistleblower hit 400k views, but we couldn't get our schedules to align before Christmas, however I do now find it quite funny that the 'debunk' is more 'yeah this is all happening but it's OK because I have a northern accent'. 2024/25 are going to be interesting.
This guy must be a paid shill, unless there is legislation to protect the general public from all these invassive measures to get us off the road, then they will all happen, he didn't debunk jack imo
People shouldn't be buying into this rubbish - it's yet more of the 'syops' recently employed by the state, designed purely to destabilise, cause unrest and keep people on the back foot.
We veered away from the letter you referred to, which I can debunk pretty much all of it, but in our recording( with Jack), we decided to change the narrative away from the letter, and more to what is "Factual". Which I was happy to do. The topics in the letter on both Insurance and Technology are all areas I provide consultancy on, and I am more than happy to do a vid with you and go through the letter. It is significant/pertinent that it is made clear what information Insurers can use, and they Absolutely cannot and will not be able to control a vehicle, where in the future ( 2050 potentially), only a peer-to-peer network would be able to do. The letter you referred to in your video is is "manufactured" for a point, the points raised has potential credibility, the letter does not. Not sure what bearing my accents has, but thank you.
@@motorclaimguruI'd love to know what your thoughts are on 15 minute cities, CBDC digital social credit score system and facial recognition cameras that are being installed everywhere, is this all bollocks too?
If you really can't see that all this IS about control, restricting the population,...I don't know what else to say to be honest.
Seems to me that a lot of what was said in the letter has been disproven… 1. alcoguard linked to insurance companies and fitted to all cars - no 2. Older cars not being able to get insured - no 3. Data harvesting.. yes but anonymous and NOT with real time links to insurers who then adjust their premiums to suit. -- there is potentially an issue going forward but it’s important to try and stick to proven information so we can act on it properly. It’s just too easy to write an ‘anonymous’ letter with loads of allegations and little to back them up. Also don’t think insulting Northern accents is a particularly helpful addition to the debate.
If an insurance company is violating your right to privacy, you should see the problem right there.
While I've seen so many videos over 2023 and 2022 about political leftist nonsense But also how dangerous technology has really become and how the Government controls us. I'm still waiting on people to go into lock step and revolt against this shit and over throw the government and powers at play. I'm well aware of what's going on but no one is actually doing anything other than creating talking points about it. It's like me saying I'm aware I'm eating unhealthy but nothing will change until I take action to change that. Also no Voting doesn't fix this. Also overall mental health has gone to shit as a society and I can't help but think this is one of the reasons that some commit suicide because things are objectively bad and nothing has shown that anything is getting any better. So they say to themselves ..Why should I suffer in such a shit world now?
If insurance is doing who else is?
I think a question I ask is will young people still care about learning to drive? It was a right of passage when I was growing up but my son isn't bothered about learning. I figured he would change his mind but he's 25 now and still not interested. If the enjoyment is sucked out of the process it will just become a part of a job I would imagine. You have ability to drive you get paid more, but I can't see why young people would be enthusiastic to learn because of the pleasure that we used to obtain from driving. Very very interesting show thanks both of you.
And this is one of the most pertinent points that rarely gets referred too, but is bang on point
The pleasure of driving is just one of many, many pleasures that are being systematically eliminated.
That's why I sold my MX5 after just 1600 miles. Much better off driving my 07 diesel Octavia which is comfortable and ridiculously economical. I once drove over to Wales with the Madza and found SEVEN miles of decent not camera'ed road - out of a total distance of 137 miles...
100% getting a 25 to leave the house away from the computer is next to impossible now, when they do they are on the phone anyway. My son grew up riding dirt bikes, go carts, snowmobiles. 24 this year and still has no drivers license. I have been on him since 16 as years of record make a difference on insurance. At this point I believe he would be just as happy to be driven everywhere the rest of his life. I make him walk and tell him if he wants a ride then pay for it, my time +fuel insurance, 10% repair cost both ways x2. So he choses to walk. I turned 16 and had my ticket to drive the same day, written test, driving test, plated and insured my 1976 CB 360t honda motorcycle and drove off. Kids today do not seek freedom like we did, I blame the education system for destroying the though of free speech. So glad to be at the end side of life. Knowing I live in the best of times the world has ever seen. FREEDOM WITH minimal government.
so true @@dungareesareforfools
The Insurance Guru is brilliant- he helped me to fight esure on a claim a few years back. Great value
“ under EU directives “ , I thought we left. Big Brother , Nanny State it’s all here.
Still looking for your brexit benefits mate - care to list your top three?
You'll never be able to leave. It's the hotel california.
@@derekr1113have we been allowed to have any ? Or being betrayed at every turn ?
@@derekr1113Your lot won't let Brexit happen - mate.
Things like this are the very reason we wanted out of it . .
We can have pints of wine in that great British tradition....so much winning
My only real concerns here are; the potential to take away our ability to control where we go and what we do, that the system will be more open to abuse by any party, and we will have to reply on the technology around us working without fault 100% of the time. Great discussion, lots of good and not so good, makes you think doesn't it, what will the future hold...
Well why would you want to go anywhere?
WHY?
@@secretsquirrel6718For the sheer hell of it is enough. As it has been for time immemorial.
Depends on how it's being implemented, it will definitely get abused that's for sure.
Perhaps they could ban the people who cause the accidents, that would lower premiums and make the roads safer. It's about money.
@chappy2121 how do you ban people who cuase accidents ?
@@chappy2121it's not about money, it's about control.
I think your classic cars being monitored by other cars all the time will only apply in built up areas Jack. Stick to the quiet roads you do test drives on and you'll be fine ;-) I still think it would be more likely that eventually insurance companies would want all cars (including classic cars) fitted with black boxes and there will be a campaign at some point to persuade us it will be in our interests to do so e.g. currently my energy company is constantly harassing me to install a smart meter as it is in my interest to do so apparently
And no government has brought in, or intends to bring in legislation to allow energy companies to force you to have a smart meter fitted. Why this constant paranoia? Who cares what the very few drivers of classic cars are doing? Most are sensible. People who drive cheap old cars, which will fall into the same 'unconnected' group will end up having their car written off if they have an accident. If an accident they are involved in is fatal, or causes serious injury, the police will no doubt issue a report, and the insurance company may well use that to refuse to compensate the first party if they are proven to be at fault. So, the only people who will be high-risk to the insurance company are those with valuable classic cars who, by definition, are going to be driving much more carefully, and over considerably less miles.
As far as I'm concerned a smart meter will only benefit the energy company - I'll still use whatever I need to use, regardless of what the smart meter tells me.
I agree entirely, it's all about the next step, when the meter can be used to stop supply. . . . Oh . . And the days of using before paying are coming to an end. . . . We will all be paying in advance. I asked an engineer who came to install one ( with an apprentice). . . " What is easier, installing one of these in every house in the UK, or just texting me once a month/quarter for a meter reading ?
No real answer forthcoming I'm afraid.
I have turned mine off
Unless the smart meter will actually save me money then I don't want one. I'm quite happy to send them the reading myself every month and don't buy the "save you money" and "no more estimated readings" rhetoric they push. I suspect it will eventually become mandatory though or it will cost people more not to have one. Back to cars ... my dealership asked last year if I wanted a black box installed "free of charge" so I could track all my journeys/fuel economy on an app on a phone. Again, totally for my benefit and no mention of them using my data. They seemed slightly puzzled/disappointed when I politely declined their offer :-)
@@markhealey3831Do you mean you have switched off the little display in your house? Cos that’s not the smart meter…
Quite a few thoughts on this excellent piece:
Surely if 'interconnected cars' are going to be such a fantastic thing, we will only need fire and theft insurance🤷
Yet we all know most insurance companies a parts of larger financial institutions whose only SIM is to make as much money as possible with the minimal risk ..... so premiums will NOT reduce!
As for Alcoguard how do you regulate who provides the breathe sample...and does it tackle the equally important issue of driving under the influence of drugs (recreational or prescription).
I think as you highlighted with introduction of average speed cameras it's opening a Pandora's Box!
The premiums are set by underwriting (calculating risk) and adjusted by the market. The insurance system is centruries old, developing very slowly at large. Some bits of coverage (car glass, for instance) is continually making a loss, and it's gotten much worse the last few years, with windscreens costing £2500 instead of £250 (sensors, cameras and allsorts), while being thinner to save weight and emissions, which makes them break more often. The premium for this bit is about £50 per year, depending. No single insurance company can increase this premium to where it should be (£250, perhaps?) without losing business. "Luckily", there are other coverages that traditionally offset this by a margin. The business is making a healthy profit, for sure, but the competition keeps the premiums about as low as they can be and still pay everyone involved. (Gas/electricity, investors, banks, landlords, reinsurers, employees etc.) In fact, in periods where the insurance companies earn a lot of money on investments, the premiums can be too low to produce a profit on their own.
Also, the EU demands a lot from the business and monitors it closely, which is good. Duckduckgo EIOPA for more info.
In Victoria Australia, we have what we call an alcohol Interlock Device, where the device is installed in the car of a convicted drink driver.
The driver needs to blow into the device, and return a 0 alcohol level, and that is every time they want to start the car.
Some were getting around the device by having family members, or mates blow into it, but now there is a camera in the device to make sure the driver is the one blowing into the device.
The system is controlled via the Courts, and the Police, and it depends on the Court’s how long the device stays connected to the car.
I have been asking for years the question of who needs to be insured for the consequences of an accident of a "driverless" car. Is it the writer of the software, the maker of the control system, or the manufacturer of the vehicle?
It surely can't be the owner, who is merely another passenger.
Nobody ever seems to have an answer.
@@The_Original_Geoff_B Most jurisdictions it is mandatory by law to have vehicle insurance. Whether it is private insurance or government run insurance the vehicle owner pays the premium. It will take massive class action law suits against the vehicle mfg's, software co's & government road infrastructure holders to change the status quo where the liability now falls on them in the case of autonomous vehicles for insurance to be dropped from being levied as a premium against vehicle owners. Expect to pay for auto insurance for a long time to come............unless those said parties are forced by the public at large into paying for it............in which case they will end their production of autonomous vehicles because their liability will be too high.
Sounds like driving classic cars will be much more fun in the future. You can drive like you're on a rally stage, and all the autonomous vehicles will see you and do their best to get out of your way, while at the same time warning other autonomous vehicles that you are coming so they can get out of your way too!
Another "benefit" of being in an AV is that wily pedestrians will see you coming and step out in front of you, just because they know it'll stop. You'll never reach your destination! 🙂
Exactly that. "I'd like to have the Evo Triangle to myself and a few friends for half an hour on the 20th and I'll happily pay the £xx charge for there to be no speed limits" - makes more financial sense than driving all the way to the Nurburgring for the same experience.
...and you'll be able to carry on using leaded petrol in pre-1990 cars 👍
@@stevemawer848 Yes, this very thing has occurred to me too. You can bet that it will happen in any town centre on a Friday night after said pedestrians have had a few.
Just to add: in italy there are already signs about this topic. The Movein blackbox that controls how much km you do in your old car in exchange for a slight discount on the insurance and limits you to 9k km then you will get fined. Also on the south of italy insurance companies started to negate insurance for 20yo cars (which are partially historical here).
Very interesting couple of videos, thanks. This splits into two areas, Control (which at present remains largely untested because so few cars are actually controlled), and Monitoring, which is almost certain to happen if technology continues to develop.
They know everything. From linking us to the internet.
the tech is there since ages, its just the people need to be primed to accept it (or even cheer for their own enslavement)
Im pretty tired of loosing autonomy to risk mitigation. Life is inherently dangerous and taking freedoms away in the name of safety leads only to one place. Dystopia is already here lol
Agree people are becoming very risk averse. Obviously we have to be sensible and safe on the roads but I don’t want loads more cameras and rules everywhere and I don’t understand why people are so accepting of them in general.
@@callummunro5400 I drove down to Cardiff last Saturday, clear weather, above freezing and on the dual carriageways from Merthyr Tydfill to Cardiff it was incredible the number of people doing 45-50 mph. Now, there were a couple of sections with 50 limits near on-slips, but they were just... dozing.
On the way back took in a small section through Herefordshire and the (A-road!) A4111 had some bends, but got stuck behind TWO cars (about 1/4 mile apart but visibly going the same speed - 30.
30MPH on a (yes single-carriage, and with some bends) main A-road....
I understand caution, I don't see the need to speed for the sake of it, but the general standard of sheer inability to drive with conditions, to a sensible standard of making progress, is getting beyond comprehension.
@@callummunro5400 Do know anyone who has asked for these things well anyone with rational thought that is! we are governed by big tech and big business I saw this coming about 20 years ago and its been creeping ever since. Boiling frogs I believe is the term often used doesn't sound like a conspiracy theory now, every day seems to bring more,
This Guru's assertion that EU directives don't apply to UK as we are no longer in the EU is a red herring. The UK car market is far too small for manufacturers to produce UK-only cars. That's why Euro 5 emissions rules still apply to any new car you buy in UK today, as will Euro 6, 7, 8 etc etc.
I agree. Let’s be honest, our politicians are all pretty wet and cow tow to what Europe wants, either directly or on the sly. Mostly on the sly.
Not quite, we have a transition period,then UK law has to be enacted. In relation to emissions, It is not the same, as we have agreed to these as part of Global agreements,which are outside of EU directives. EU Law categorically does not apply in the UK any longer.The EU does not need to manufacture UK specific cars, as the requirements are identical
@@motorclaimguruThe point is no-one will produce UK-only cars. So whatever the law in EU is, will define the cars the UK gets.
@@gzk6nk Your assertion that no one will produce UK-only cars because the market is far to small is erroneous. Foreign auto manufacturers have been producing (Australian Design Rule [ADR] ) cars for the Australian market for many years - a car market that is siginficantly smaller than the UK.
No-one told the cretins who voted for Brexit. Not that they would have listened, they're proud that they never learn from people who know more than them and their small-minded prejudices.
What the Guru says is based on legislation that is in place now, but who knows what is coming
Time to buy more tinfoil.
@@heiner71 Yes, you will need a lot to wrap your car to make a Faraday Cage around it.
@@jerzywoking1699 'tinfoil' may have its uses in the near future 👍
I do... I keep abreast of what is happening in the future.
@@cannaroe1213
A proper Faraday cage can completely block electric fields; cars do not do that.
Well, we better learn how to use the 3 sea shells....
Too many variables to be totally autonomous imo. Not only that the current UK road network is an absolute mess. Current vehicle sensors in cars are shocking. Handful of times now I've been driving work vehicles on the motorway and the brakes slam on for no reason. Very dangerous.
Same here with my 2019 Volvo XC60 a few times and with my 2022 Opel/Vauxhall Insignia GSi. I do not trust those sensors and stuff.
Personally, I'm not reassured at all; it's the classic balance between "rights" versus "freedoms." In other words, how much risk are you willing to accept to preserve your freedoms? Of course, today these decisions are largely taken out of our hands and governments inevitably opt for more control, as and when new technologies become available. Not to mention the potential for these new technologies to go horribly wrong or to be hacked by "bad actors." Great interview, Jack.
👍
Freedom to kill people by driving drunk? Freedom to kill people while texting on your phone? You may not do these things but there are thousands out there who do.
With respect: the governments are puppets of Unelected and Unregulated people in Swiss institutions
Just like ponce Charlie.. just a puppet
I think that given the fact insurance companies leverage the usage of a black box for young drivers against premiums that aren't financially ruinous, how long before they demand that people do share that data (that can be bypassed GDPR with explicit consent) in return for premiums they can afford. Manufacturers may not want to work with insurance companies but they're not the ones underwriting the policy. I don't want to get all grassy knoll but insurance companies have the power to let you drive legally or not so why would they not demand you consent to their data harvesting requirements.
Nobody is taking my classic car away from me.
If things do get bad no one will actually want it, never mind take it away. That’s the worry.
Sadly, it will be "Nobody"
He'll take mine too, sadly.
And nobody will, so relax
I'm not worried about you driving your classic car carefully on a Sunday, I'm worried about the thousands of inattentive people nominally "in control" of a couple of tonnes travelling at 80 or 90 MPH for tens of thousands of miles a year.
I had concerns when the 1st video went live. It felt like there was more to this and this sort of thing was maybe not quite missinformation but certainly missing a level of detail. Very glad you posted this follow up with a balanced view and more explaination. That Guru guy seems quite level headed.
The first video was a massive exaggeration/bollocks.
@@EvoraGT430as is this one.
Pure FUD.
Well, I was trying to be polite as I like Jack’s content normally. The 1st vid was pretty click baity. Benefit of the doubt n all that but I just saw the insta promotion for this vid and that is blatant click bait.
Here in Canada, we have amber alerts for missing children and other situations. Possibly, if a person is suspected to be operating the vehicle in question then it could be shut down. The same might apply to a stolen vehicle. On a positive if it is known that a person has several DUI charges and has a suspended licence and no insurance and continues to drive the vehicle it could be immobilized. But we know that the police and insurance companies don't make mistakes. Unlike the movie Brazil.
Also insurance companies use different standards than the traffic laws. So you may be in a situation where you were not charged in a collision or for excess speed, they may increase your premium regardless. And one is not open to defence, unlike in court. And you won't get far taking an insurance company to court. And the manufacturers will be reluctant to market cars made too difficult to insure.
The insurance companies keep promising cheaper insurance if you let them install one of these monitoring systems in your car. Well one couple did so. Then one day they had to suddenly stop because a kid ran into the middle of the street. The next month the insurance company bumped up their insurance premium by 20% for 'risky driving behavior ', and ignored the parent's justification. Proof that the insurance companies want these monitoring systems installed purely to fish for excuses to charge more money and blame you for it.
@@noseboop4354 Rubbish - Both my kids had these boxes. The situation you described does not happen. There would be several warnings before such a change would occur. there must have been many instances of "children running into the road". My daughter was rear ended at a roundabout and the telemetry from the black box proved she had come to a stop before she was shunted into the car in front, disproving the van driver's claims he had driven into a pile-up, saving my daughter from loss of no-claims and an insurance increase.
You have 💯% called for drinking their Cool Aid. If, maybe, possibly. Don't fall into their trap - exercise your own mind and don't live in fear of miniscule chances that will impossible ridiculous circumstances on the majority of ppl who are doing no harm
Good job we are in a free country 😅, its scary how much personal information companies have and how the hell do they get it! ...... Excellent stuff as always Jack buddy 👍
Thank you old chap. And all the best for the new year!!
@@Number27 All the best to you Jack..... let's hope 2024 is kind to us all 🙏👍
One act of parliament like " online harms" is all is needed to change who and how car data is handled.
Read how nefarious online harms bill actually is little to do with protecting children.
Built in software backdoor for governments to do whatever they like.
I worked at HPE on a project where we tried to help lease companies and car companies to add value and possibly monetise data from vehicles to give very high resolution detail of driving conditions. The platform was able to take this data and make it anonymous and then allow other companies purchase the data to add value using it. Consider all of the data a modern car collects, for example the wipers are on, the headlights are on, the traction control has activated several times and the very local outside temperature is very low. This data could be used to warn other drivers of low visibility and a risk of black ice or poor traction. There is so much value that can be obtained from connected vehicles but it is SO important that this must be controled and not abused. Our platform provided that capability.
How does this technology fit in with a social credit score? … I’m sure if you had float the idea of a lock down to an expert in 2019 they’d of said it could never happen
I wonder when the 'climate change' lockdowns are going to start 🤔
In a Western world of democracy, the social credit score should never occur, if you are in a communistic society, with absolute control over everything in your life.
Plain and simple, insurance companies and carmakers better figure out how to offer the "driver self insured Flintstones package and the ai driven corporate insured jetson package. I simply refuse to insure, "steer-by-wire","throttle-by-wire","brake-by-wire","e-brake-by-wire","transmission engagement-by-wire","clutch-by-wire", as that is a vehicle control system im never truly driving. If the government and auto manufacturers insist on giving everyone a car they are never really driving and they trust their own tech so much then they should be responsible for insuring it. Plain and simple, i will never buy a new car just because of how they are building them. Im proud to be a Flintstone and im proud to insure my own real driving.
I work in manufacturing, autonomous and interconnection is good when everything works but the day it fails it can be catastrophic and fatal, now you can imagine it on the motorway and things go south.
You're still invading ppls privacy & forcing ppl to give up their freedom. You will kill the freedom to get in your car & go anywhere at anytime in anyway. I own & daily drive 80s cars, no black box or any tech crap to monitor me will go in any of my Cars.
Interesting video, aligns with views of a lot of people I've interviewed at various OEMs. Suspect it'll be cost of fuel which will be a nail in the coffin for a lot of older cars, sadly.
EVs will rely on a failing grid with unreliable energy. Not just hydrocarbons are going to increase mobility costs. Bottom line 'they' want the end of private mobility.
Some older cars (particularly non-carburated) are just as efficient as modern cars, and with a few modifications can be more efficient than modern, heavier, cars. They will never be safer (unless a rollcage is welded in, then they're MUCH safer) but they can be made more fuel efficient quite trivially. Actually the biggest thing holding them back is the legality of removing the original car engine computer and replacing it with a modern one.
@@cannaroe1213 If fuel prices increase significantly, which is likely if there's considerably less demand, the majority of people aren't going to spend money to make older cars marginally more efficient. Governments are pushing EVs; if this continues the automotive landscape will change considerably over the next decade. Not sure what country you're in so can't comment on legality of removing an ECU wherever you are, but there's nothing in the legislation here in the UK - you can run whatever engine management system you want. It still won't help older cars much if fuel is considerably more expensive than electric.
@@philthewriterI'm from UK but live in Germany - UK and other english-speaking countries are unusually permissive about modifying cars, I didn't realise until I left. In most of Europe you can't install eBay parts from China, they have to be EU certified, which means if they don't make it for your year and model (like LED headlights on a VW T4) a'int nothing you can do about it, there's no legal way to get it. Some countries like Germany go a step further and say you have to have them installed by a registered mechanic (not lightbulbs, but they'll treat any engine mod like open heart surgery) and once they've finished, if it affects the emissions, the exhaust gasses have to be tested (€3000) and if you fail you dont get your money back or 50% off your next test. It's another 3K. For this reason only the rich modify their cars here. ECU swap requires the emissions test, so no one does it. Also I think in UK you cant have an ECU that can be reprogrammed in the car (to bypass emissions/performance tradeoffs), the cops will seize your car for possibility of rolling coal. Not in Alabama, the Lord's chosen people.
@@philthewriteralso we're not talking "modest" improvements. You buy a new crate engine,
i really don't know how people can look at these subjects and not see a super bleak 1984 or minority report type future. none of this is good for motorists. none of it.
You the man Geoff
It is not indeed, I can take you down many a rabbit hole.. you need to research FCA fines on supermarkets selling your data, then buying the companies that they sold the data too, now making supermarkets £125 million... one of the industries that buys the data are insurers for heath insurance
Mmm. Can't say that my mind has been put at ease by anything discussed. I got the impression that this was a damage limitations exercise for the insurance expert. I still think we need to be concerned about this. Just in case it turns out to be true, which I have a horrible feeling that it will.
Clearly says in the video he is not in the corner of insurance companies.. he fights them for a living, and as you say what he says is not exactly reassuring!
@@Number27 I just meant he is an expert on how the insurance industry works. I also think he knows more than he's letting on.
It is definitely not "damage limitation", I am no fan of insurers, and I pretty much despise all of the "future of motoring , ADAS, V2X, peer to peer networking, " , What I wanted to do is present "Facts" @@matthewgodwin3050 you do need to be concerned, just not quite yet,
Anyone who has the slightest understanding of what is happening internationally will realise that the whistleblower letter is totally legitimate.
Anything that can be done in the field of surveillance and control is being done or will be done as soon as technology is ready for prime time.
I am shocked at how very few people seem to have any idea of what the UN is doing, and all it’s subsidiaries, such as WHO, IPCC, UNESCO etc.
It makes me realise that we are sitting ducks because “*normies” simply refuse to believe that the world is not at all as they thought it was.
That is a horrible moment, when the penny drops, and you realise it’s all connected and you’ve been living in The Truman Show for most to all of your lives.
(*this term is soon going to be as belittling as “conspiracy theorists” now is. The latter have largely been correct but not heard).
Could a government shut off your car in the future? Well in 🇨🇦 they already happily shut off your bank account so....
I suspect the if people are politically exposed, such as the many people involved in politics who have had banking issues in recent years, private companies could choose to withdraw services such as EV charging, so perhaps that might be a more likely way of limiting someone's use of a car.
If the car is fully automated and does all of the driving / maneuvers and "knows" what the other vehicles are doing then aside from theft then there shouldn't be no need for insurance, should there?
With respect, this insurance expert isn’t operating at executive & policy level. If he was, he’d be aware of the role of the UN2030 sustainable development goals, not the ostensible reasons but the real reasons for constraints.
The elites have agreed with all our governments to deprive us of private transportation. Sorry, but that’s been agreed. It’s not democratic but then again we’ve not been In democratic systems for half a century or more. Argue if you think it’ll help.
If every car that has been purchased were on the road simultaneously, one would be able to travel less than a metre a minute.
The fact he can create a business fighting insurance companies on behalf of the (supposedly) insured just further reinforces my choice to never have anything to do with insurers in any situation in which I can possibly avoid it.
These sensors may be on the cars now but they are currently rubbish...my crash avoidance system is so random that i simply don't trust it so I turn it off.
These systems need to massively improve before they can be trusted in every occasion.
I think this guy is missing a few issues.
The kill switch could be linked to your green social score so imagine youve done too many miles, the car could refuse to start... nothing to do with insurance.
Also, this assumes you own the car, what if this is all written into your hire agreement?..you can rent the car but agree to the insurance/ car/government dept. remotely controlling your usage??
The Kill Switch WILL be linked to your Social Credit - and your on line food ordering from Amazon Pantry. I read all about this in 2017...
Plus, give my regards to Thelma, would you?
Interesting exchange on a few oddball and serious questions but I think there was one huge thing that was ignored in the discussion. It largely revolved about the data security of the individual in terms of what an insurance company may or may not gain about the vehicle and “ Passenger” I don’t think going forward we need to talk about a “driver” being insured. This leads me to the elephant in the discussion - that we will not need to own a personal vehicle. You will request a car on an app - say -Uber - for a car - it will arrive at the time requested to your location - the hirer /“passenger” “ will use it as they require, return to a destination anywhere any time - the cost being deducted per mile from your credit card - job done!!!!
Yes, this will be a massive bonus for people with mobility problems, for anyone wanting to get home after a session at the pub and so on. Another benefit that is not mentioned is that streets will no longer be littered with parked cars sitting there 90% of their lives waiting for their owners to need to used them.
Not to mention the bonus for the thousands of people who suffer life-changing injuries in "accidents" caused by inattentive drivers.
absolutely spot on
Surely if you are the only person insured to drive that car they can identify you. And they can identify your car - if it's speeding for instance. Surely more and more cars will be on cloned plates too - 'unconnected' cars that is.
You need to change 'revel' to 'reveal' btw.
The example that you have provided has been in play for over 30 years. If a speed camera records that my car has sped by, then I will receive the fine in the mail - irrespective of who was actually driving the car.
Yes. And these 'speed cameras' will be attached to every connected car that passes you. @@georgebettiol8338
Simple. Number plates are an anachronism, soon even "unconnected" cars will be required to have some sort of transponder that announces what they are and any vehicle without one will stand out like a sore thumb to the less stupid version of ANPR ("What? You used cameras to read the characters on numbers plates?" 🤣) which will come with them.
I am sure you are correct. Although I imagine there will be plenty of ways to cheat it. A major issue these days is people not registering their cars when they buy them, which also means no tax or insurance.@@TonyWhitley
Great vid Tim.....This needs capping / governing by the government as they did with energy costs. Insurance companies are greedy bastards theres no doubt. Lets face it they can have their cake and eat it as car insurance is compulsory by law. For example Admiral made £234 million profit in the first 6 months of 2023. A percentage of this profit should be injected back into insurance policies in order to reduce premiums for drivers. I agree that newer, more complex vehicles are becoming more specialist to repair but what about older cars ? There are now families out there living on the bread line that are giving up their 20 year old vehicles as they cant afford to run them. They need to drive to work, collect kids from school, do their weekly shop and now they can't. I think we are going to see a MASSIVE increase in uninsured vehicles on our roads from now on
The first death(s) caused by autonomous car(s) will be an interesting insurance claim. Lots of this stuff is decades away even if it happens. I'll be 6ft under by then. Good luck
Exactly, there are millions of cars not able to interact & they still making cars that can’t interact so it’s at least 30 years away
Poo
Thanks to Tesla and others beta testing their 'self driving' software on public roads, there have already been deaths due to autonomous cars. The companies involved will claim the driver was supposed to be supervising, but they've engineered the distracted driving in.
A Tesla has already killed a cyclist who was pushing her bike - apparently Electric Jesus doesn't think cyclists should do that.
There has been a number of reported cases of autonomous vehicles causing accidents that involved a fatality - so it has already occurred. However I have no knoweledge of the associated insurance claims - would be interesting.
It's good to know that the Ins. companies won't lobby the govt. for access to all info provided by 'smart cars', or pass legislation requiring all licensed vehicles and drivers to carry 'full info' tracking devices when operating on public highways. Yep, govts. are totally against the "for your safety, comrade" concept.
An excellent video Jack. So I can be driving round in my non connected car enjoying life but be grassed up by a team of Tesslas. How depressing. Car fanatics really are on borrowed time.
just change one digit of your number plate!
15:28 potentially if the autonomous vehicle had to decide between two people to crash into, the one with higher bone density may experience less injury from being run over. this could be nonsense because im not a doctor.
Very interesting discussion Jack. As your guest said, much of the technology is here already and deployed but next step however is connecting this technology together and that worries me. It’s not so much the privacy issue, but more than reliability of the tech that we are putting so much faith into, it’s already proved with self driving not to be as reliable as we were told, what happens when we’ve got devices talking to other devices without human intervention? There must be millions of lines of code in most cars these days, what’s to stop external actors building in ways to control these devices (they stopped being cars, long ago)?
I think the self driving cars in the US came too early. Those tech companies/new car companies are all in a rush to develop the best self driving vehicle software in the world to allow Level 4 and Level 5 driving. For that they need real life data of how their vehicles are reacting. There is an absence of any guilt for those who died in car accidents involving self driving vehicles.
@@Gentleman...Driver How do dead drivers suffer from guilt?
How many millions of lines of code do you think there are in a phone that you rely on every day? I've written some of them and spent several years making sure "external actors" couldn't (easily) take control of them.
@@TonyWhitley Didn't go too well for Harry and Elton.
If the new proposals by the DoT are made law in the UK then the law will mandate that the Government (or manufacture, on their behalf) MUST be able to take control of those devices, and modifications to prevent that would be illegal.
How would you join a Motorway from a slip road if there is a train of cars following closely? There would be no gaps.
they would make a gap for you
The end game! We loose and you might have to put your car in the garage and a window in your living room so you can still see it and remember how it used to be when you could afford it!
Regarding GDPR, the data can only be anonymised by default, but you CAN grant permission for your data to be identifiable. If you can only get insurance if you grant permission, the current GDPR protection is completely eliminated. It's one step away.
As long as there are rich and somewhat powerful people owning classic cars, I really don't see it happening.
Wishful thinking perhaps because the EU has already destroyed so much...
Fingers crossed.
Thanks for the video and best wishes for the New Year from the Netherlands
How?
@@jsanders100 They will oppose it
@@sebastiend.5335this is fa to do with the eu as someone pointed out eu law offers protection our government wants to scrap. Now we’re out we have less influence and have to accept exactly what the (Chinese) manufacturers decide about cars. A few rich cc owners can’t do anything.
Rich and powerful owners don't drive their cars Bro. They're mainly tax free investments. Same with some yachts - inheritance tax free.
If a car cannot be legally driven, whats it worth?
John Deer, the farming equipment manufacture in America, has and does use, the telematic system to switch off equipment if payments are not paid. Usually happens when vehicle is parked up, and will now not start. Bricked is the term used.
Very good video, these insurance "queries" seem to me to be really intrusive. The character John Malkovich plays in Red and Red 2 being determined to be off grid is a fine example. This noseyness is frightening. I think all the political parties will do the same thing, nothing. I do think though older cars are controlled by the driver and we should all be wise to remember that. Very interesting video Jack. Best wishes. Ben 🇬🇧🇮🇹🚌🚐
I drive older cars and find insurance cost fall once the car hits 20 years old. I pay £142 fully comp on a model year 2000 Peugeot 406 coupe 2.9 litre, that's with a regular insurance company the Halifax via a price comparison website.
To be fair I think he did debunk the content of the letter and there isn't anything he said here that isn't an obvious development for the future. In fact much of the technology is already in existence today. GDPR [provided it stays] will prevent non anonymised data going between parties.
It may be an obvious development of the future but I still find it pretty horrifying ..
@@Number27 Completely agree but then look at how personal surveillance has increased over the past 25 years. Everything we do is tracked/monitored. I'm a secondary school teacher and the level of data collection we do on the kids from the moment they're born is staggering. Nobody has the time to do anything with it but it's there. And that's only one small part of the surveillance landscape. Fast forward 10-20 years and our movements in cars will be the least of our worries !
@@davyboy888 "Nobody has the time to do anything with it"
Sounds like a job for an AI...
@@jameshoward2738 Maybe but all that's capable of right now is finding/sifting/organising/re-presenting. There still won't be the time to do anything with it as most of it is useless. It's like collecting, keeping and organising household trash. You could get huge amounts of information from it - it could help in solving crime etc... but its relevance is very limited.
Road Pricing - if the vehicle is reporting where it is then they won't even need cameras. Your car will say to the privatised roads companies exactly how much to take from you.
Anyone else expecting local councils to start selling roads to privatised businesses who want to charge us to drive on our local roads?
Tories out. They take from us all to give to the rich, and they've done this for over 200 years.
15 years ago I was working in a Government Department where there were discussions going on about “black box” technology in hire cars used by staff.
The concern from staff representatives was staff privacy and obviously the official side’s view was safety and control. In the end it was an accepted (begrudging) safety measure. The headline figures used in the final discussions were speeding figures picked up from users’ black boxes….
Max speed on M4, by a Civil Servant: 104mph
Max speed throughout the department, a military officer: 114mph “l was late for an important meeting” was the excuse.
I now get almost all of my fun on the water under power or sail. Jack, you should try it 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
120mph or how we germans call it a relaxed cruise on autobahn lol
btw yeah fun on boats is great, I love the freedom of water esp the sea
Progressive offers a "discount" if you use their tracking app.
Always thought they will get people out of cars with insurance hikes , still so many foreign friends 36:07 driving old cars with no insurance or license
If the insurers were worried about Classic cars not complying then they would already have penalised cars which are not subject to an MOT. Am I missing the point here ?
Nope, you are spot on, Classic cars are not an issue to insurers.
Stick with car videos, Jack, and don't worry yourself about "leaked" letters. The UK car insurance industry is different to Germany, and Germany is different to Italy etc etc. What may or may not apply there will not necessarily apply in the UK, as far as insurance on classic cars goes in the future, based on your "experts" theory of interconnected autonomous cars, they surely will not require insurance, who would be the insured??? which means the only market will be you and your Pantera 😉. More Pantera, please, theirs already enough doom and gloom, we need you to let your enthusiasm shine through the darkness
Alco Guard - what's wrong with drivers being sober?
This is very interesting,I like the guy,he talks a lot of sense.
In the future, the goverment will be the "insurance company" - Here in the US we're already seeing this for property insurance... Even now, private auto insurance companies offer deivces that plug into your vehicle's OB2 port to monitor driving behavior in order to earn a discount, but what will prevent them from requiring it (or contectivity via cell phone app while driving) to obtain and hold a policy in the future? Answer: only a matter of when, not if.
America has a road death problem and also a deeper issue with authority. You don't trust your system or the state. For good or bad that is part of your culture. Even getting a speeding ticket is seen as corrupt police and should be fought. Where I think this model falls apart is not every country is modelled on America as you hold onto certain things as a form of false history. You measure in miles inches and you have a 2nd amendment as though there can be no further amendments. Setting up a company or paying tax is one of the most challenging things you can do. Car insurance in America is high because you can sue for a high amount irrespective of my own earning. As you say there is a deep financial motivation to find fault with a 3rd party, not because of fault, but potential income. It's no good taking you to court if you only have an income.
The ability to remotely turn off a vehicle exists and has been used for a few years now a farmer friends tractor or combine refused to start it was almost new he contacted the main dealer to be told he had missed two payments so they had disabled it
And I can confirm that is 100 % true, I have seen the same
But that's the manufacturer, not an insurance company, and the owner may have that "feature" written into their contract. Always read the small (and big!) print.
If the manufacturer can do the police and government can do
@@stevemawer848the whole point is, the tech is there, and once it is any 'authority' will get to control it for one of any number of reasons
My Insurers are so crooked that they now ask if you have reversing sensors to make reversing safer and then charge you extra in case they get damaged in an accident. I rejected a car with sensors and bought one with no sensors and saved almost £60 off my insurance. Same car just no sensors. I will not be renewing with them next time round.
As long as I can remember, I've always thought that people of the future will think it crazy that people of our time were allowed to operate motor vehicles on public roads at high speeds and be completely free to go any speed at any time, and crash into anything we like, as hard as we like.
Where I live, I'm not at liberty to drive at any speed any time, crash into anything I like and as hard as i like. What country provides such freedoms?
Oh that thought - let’s ban everything.
@@georgebettiol8338you are free to do it. But you won't be free afterwards as you will be arrested and (rightly) put in prison
Why stop at cars? That's a perfect reason to lock people indoors. Of course you may think that is a fine idea, as long as it's others, not you.
Hopefully those people of the future will wonder why in the hell animals are given so much liberty while they are caged like criminals from birth, to keep them "safe".
I've not news for you. The ability to remotely take control of your car has been around for well over 20 years. I was helping my neighbour move a car away from debt collectors posing as bailiffs, who had come to collect it. I won't bore you with the details (long story), but suffice to say that as I started to drive it away, this "bailiff" pressed a button on something in his hand, which instantly cut out the car and I wasn't able to restart it.
I've since discovered that what they did, whatever device they used at that time, was illegal but the fact that it was even possible at that time shocked me nonetheless. The car? Not the latest model, not a 2020 car, not even a 2010 car, but a year 2000 VW Passat.
All of this will happen, the speed camera example was a good one but again you can go back a lot further than that - seatbelts were never intended to be mandatory. And they'll get away with it too, because like everything else they will play the health and safety card making it near impossible for the public to object to it and making those who do appear to be reckless individuals who don't care about other people's safety.
You will own nothing and be happy. ~ WEF.
..has always seemed a paradoxical prescription for a market economy. None of the Davos lot will have an income, just plummeting asset values. Great wealth depends on trickle-up.
To sum up: The semblance of a democratic society is well and truly dead. Parliament is truly sovereign, even though it also gives that sovereignty away to 'higher' vested interests. We don't elect people to represent us and protect us; we merely elect the people from an approved list who enact more and more laws against us in order to protect the state from us. As a collective of individual citizens, the state is not there to facilitate our individual potential and protect our rights and freedoms, but rather the individual citizen is an enemy of the state, against whom the state needs to protect itself. Instead of the state existing solely to serve and protect the supreme citizen collective; the state is supreme and individual citizens are merely there to serve the interests of the state. They will only have the opportunity to reach their full potential where that potential concides with or is determined by the state to fufil its needs. They will only prosper in the same context. AI will literally exercise the power of life and death millions of times a day. And, most importantly, let's not forget that a digital economy no longer needs anywhere near as many people to create wealth and create and support infrastructure. Moreover, according to current ideology/'science' as carbon lifeforms we are a threat to ourselves and the planet, and even our existing numbers are unsustainable. Basically, the majority threatens the minority elite, and needs to be controlled and/or culled. AI 'lifeforms' don't need to be educated, don't require healthcare, don't need housing or food, don't need need rest, or require recreation. You are not only no longer needed, you are a threat. Of course, the 'science' isn't reality, but is a pretext to creating a reality in which you are the problem not the solution. Cars will no longer primarily be the means to exercising freedom of movement and facilitating socio-economic mobility, but the greatest means of spying and snitching, not only on our fellow citizens but on ourselves.
I watched both videos - all I can say Jack is you should get back to reviewing cars - asap.
Like you, I'm also averse to conspiracy theories. But this is something I think we need to take seriously untill we are sure it's a real possibility or not. I don't want it to be true, and I hope it isn't proven so. However, it has a very uncomfortable ring of truth to it. Let's hope I'm wrong, because the potential repercussions are terrifying.
@@matthewgodwin3050 something being labeled a 'conspiracy theory' has absolutely nothing to do with how much truth there is to it.
About as exciting as watching paint dry, get back behind the wheel Jack and leave conspiracy theories to the Tories.
Basically the car manufactory has made a product that is a ball of scrap to fix ...iv been in the motor trade for 40 years and its the worst its ever been ... you have key board engineers that are clueless . and will write your car off at a flash just by looking at pictures ....
Tim the insurance expert needs a stronger bookshelf.
There's going to be a hell of a lot of uninsured drivers going around .
An extra bracket or a block of wood fixed to the wall beneath the middle of the shelf will do. Block of wood & Gorilla glue cheapest fix.
No less models
@@SierraNovemberKilo A middle bracket the best for me .
It has lasted ten years and is holding well, it is also an optical illusion as the outer edges is curved and makes it appear as is it is bending!lol
@@motorclaimguru Haha , heavy old books .
Insurance companies may not have access to your vehicle’s data under current protection legislation but when autonomous cars become available, I suspect the state may well insure them on the basis that no individual will be paying a premium to an insurance company for a vehicle they don’t and can’t drive. Then all your data linked via the car will be accessed by the state for any purpose they choose
Switching off a car remotely has already happened I'm afraid, a news story in America just before Christmas where a car was stolen and reported to the Police who ended the pursuit by remotely deactivating the vehicle, no mention of the vehicle manufacturer or how it was done but this technology is already here 😮
In the case you've stated I'm 100% behind the tech.
@@andrewmullen4003until the tech is used against you, driving during lockdown for instance.
@@andrewmullen4003 And that's how they get you. Infringements on our rights always begin with the argument that it's necessary to stop the most reprehensible in society, but once the wedge is in the door, the "exception use case" becomes both extensive and routine. Witness the use of RIPA powers here, which were initially justified to fight terrorism, but almost immediately were used to spy on the innocent, for no other reason than because the law allowed it now.
Third party device. Ghost can do it.
we had that on a small fleet of supercar hire fleet 15 years ago, we could turn off a car remotely
I have a few cars and None are newer than 2008 , no telemetry for me thank you 😂. About 7 years ago I was given a 2014 jaguar Xf to use as a replacement while my own was being repaired, fortunately it was my friend who arranged it through his company and after a few weeks he called me to let me know he’d deleted the tracking info showing how fast I’d been travelling up the m6 … 😳 and asked me to “ keep it down “ 😂😂😂
The police already use our ring doorbell from Amazon without our authority
What if one could insure oneself from getting hit by these cars. They'd have to choose between hitting this highly insured person vs these two with no such insurance... what a lovely future
No one putting any thing on my car full stop
In some ways I get how this Big Brothering would be beneficial, in principle .. The Geofence idea -- if it was not abused -- would be a fantastic way of promoting safety of certain areas .. However, I still maintain that insurance companies are 100% there to (a) take as much money from people as they can and (b) pay out as little money as they possible can .. So thinking of their intentions as benevolent in any way is something I just can't do
They are definitely not benevolent..lol, they are downright the nastiest institutions you will ever encounter...
Sucker
Geofencing is very frightening. Any restriction of customary freedoms is like that & we must push back against these.
There is an elite, shadowy group who are the real power in the world. Their interests and ours have until recently been coincident or at least overlapping.
No longer. Our owners have determined that they no longer need us, for anything.
The implications are I hope obvious.
The only way of prices is up.......not to lower them
Yeah, they've never heard of the law of gravity!
The path to 1984 won't be quite as straightforward as some people wish or believe it will be. It has been happening for many years though. Our government has compromised our privacy already without us even knowing. Today, you can apply for a passport and the photograph from your driving licence can be automatically used, so there is one link few people think about because it's convenient for them. Your health records are digitised, every time you visit your GP with a sniffle, or perhaps an alcohol problem, that data is recorded. Unlike the commercial rivalry between insurance companies and manufacturers there is no rivalry between government departments sharing your data to achieve their objectives.
The problem, as I see it, isn't with manufacturers and insurers, it's with governments compelling them to hand over data on you either routinely or ad hoc e.g. in the event of a crash or a criminal event.
Who, for example, will control the infrastructure to run fully autonomous vehicles? Will manufacturers or insurers do that? Unlikely as it would be a bun fight to profit from it. It's likely to be controlled by governments who are known for their technical illiteracy and utter incompetence. Look what happened to the integrated NHS database billions were wasted on, and the Inland Revenue database more billions were wasted on.
Then there's the cost. Who will shoulder the burden of implementing a nationwide autonomous network, and how will that work in the north of Scotland where cellphone coverage is patchy at best even now? Now convince me that autonomous cars will work across inhospitable parts of Russia, Africa and the Americas. The public will of course be expected to pay for it but with ballooning national debts the expense will be harder to justify as time goes on when growing numbers of people are sleeping rough and overall poverty is rising, especially amongst the elderly.
Then there's the simple problem of powering all this from dwindling fossil fuel reliance. We know we are facing problems with renewable energy. If we keep going on the path we are on (we won't) we will face electricity rationing. So what is shut down first? The Heat Pumps people rely on to keep body and soul together, or maintaining an autonomous transport system? I suspect our government, in its infinite stupidity, would favour the latter, but that would only last so long.
The fact is, as Casey Stoner once said to Valentino Rossi (paraphrasing) 'Your ambition got the better of your ability'.
Our technocracy is like a child. We have only had it widely available for 40 years or so. Our industrial revolution has taken 250+ years to mature. I remember being assured that TV aerials on our roofs were the devils spawn and the means of mind control. We have gone from A Sinclair computer very few people understood to a laptop in every home, each of which with more computing power than required to send a man to the moon, and the majority of users browse the internet and watch TicToc videos.
The technical and digital possibilities are endless, and that's its Achilles heel. Everyone want's a slice of the digital pie but, at the end of the day it doesn't come down to Orwell's political vision of the world, it comes down to the energy we have available to power it.
But not every country is as corrupt as Britain. The main thrust of this is car insurance, at the moment in Britain and I include Scotland in with this your car insurance is graded on your own claims history and those around you. Theft is one of the higher costs in the UK, tell the Plumber I am going on Holiday next week and he will rob your house. But then he has a sign on the back telling you he has no tools inside overnight and we all meet the same guy at the pub to buy it off. Uninsured drivers are also a cost. Every Brit loves to tell you their no claims bonus years. I loved Brexit as it now has turned a mirror on the British as they always blame Johnny foreigner on why things are bad. To your point about digital capture laws I think the idea that Jeff Bezos, Musk and the world economic forum are taking over, well the reality of having everything farmed out to 3rd party companies only works if they had not been so greedy. Even now if Jack here does a video of a car review and I am in it I can get Google to remove the video or blur me out. No cost to me and a great inconvenience to Jack. Even him having a product in the video requires a statement saying he has a paid promotion. Why? As other people screwed it up. Yes there will always be a legal basis for using things, how the UK and Scotland implement these is up to them. This discussion isn't happening in other European countries and I don't see it happening any time soon as putting a very expensive tracker in every car is a lot more expensive than policing and prosecuting correctly. Asking your MP or Government to change a law is only the cost of the people writing it.
We call handing people envelopes stuffed full of money corruption in the UK. The Chinese consider it sensible business and it's been a tradition at their New Year for much longer than I have been alive.
You have just been told by the industry expert on this video what's going on has little to do with insurance companies. But somehow you know better than him.
Do you have any evidence that demonstrates theft is one of the higher cost's in the UK?
We had builders, including plumbers in our house for 5 months, including 2 weeks when we went on holiday. Nothing stolen. Yo are making all this nonsense up.
The facts are that Britain is at lest no worse off than before Brexit and, compared to Europe, in many cases a lot better. The only reason we're not doing better is because government 'Remainers' have not implemented much of what they could have, including ditching the ECHR which ensures the boatloads of illegal immigrants can't be deported. You don't surely think the post Brexit channel hoppers were a coincidence do you? It's an act of revenge for daring to challenge the mighty EU which is now falling apart. Meloni, Le Penn, Farage etc. now more popular figures than ever. Donald Tusk installed in Poland by the EU. Whoever heard of a coalition of minority parties with no common ground whatsoever being formed in a rush before an election. Democracy demands parties stand alone and if a coalition is to be formed it's following the election. Just another EU stitch up.
Why do you claim Bezos and Musk are greedy? They developed goods and services the public demands and became wealthy. That's free market capitalism. It means you can get just as rich if you work as hard as them.
Where's the evidence either Bezos or Musk are participants in the WEF? A favourite trick of the WEF is to feature a photograph and a description of notable politicians and businessmen on their website. It's factual but it does not indicate they have anything meaningful to do with the organisation. Visit Robert McCulloch's website and you'll find a database of Young Global leaders over decades. It's most notable for who isn't included than for who is.
BTW, the term is 'The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland'. Scotland isn't some sort of addition, it's an integral part.
There is little objection from the EU over autonomous vehicles because, in case you hadn't noticed, the EU is an authoritarian entity which doesn't tolerate criticism. As in the UK the media is owned, influenced or coerced by Brussels. @@fraserwright9482
London Buses tfl already has facial recognition cameras both inside and outside. They caught Levi Bellfieild with them.
The buses have front and rear traffic cameras to record any incidents, not facial recognition. They picked up his van on video, and that's why the police now ask for any dash cam film around any incident areas. We are big brother!!!!
Please stop this stupidity. The insurance industry is not going to sacrifice 80% of its income until you buy a connected car. Yes you can see that there will be some accident avoidance but set against the higher values of new cars and the high cost of repair due to technology, this is not a 'coming soon' feature. By the way, I have only 40 years experience in the insurance industry at a senior level and I have never worked for an insurer. Get back to the classic car reviews
It would be great if you watched the video before commenting. Clearly you have not as your comment bares no relation to what is being said.
Oh gosh yes ! Thank you man I fully agree with you !
@@Number27I'm still at minute 13 hope there will be a better surprise before the end ....
Did you watch the video in full? it helps when you do.
@@motorclaimguru watched in full, I think is not relevant for this channel and too negative, that is not the attitude of Jack, then he look to be in paranoia, for this letter found, amd seems you did not reassured him enoght
Salient point of the video: 31:42 - "Insurance is based on risk" In a connected car, I expect premiums go down when I drive in "low risk" areas in a "low risk" way, just as it currently is today. Right now, a mature driver in an classic car living out of the city has lower premiums than a 25yr old driving a sporty hot-hatch living in the city. No extra data needed, just your post code, your age, and your VIN.
Connected cars will give the insurance industry more data to charge more competitive premiums for high vs. low risk drivers. The bit I hadn't considered that the video brought up, was that "connected" cars on the road would also be able to assess risk of other cars on the road. Even if you decide to opt-out of a connected car, everyone else's car will have seen what happened, and will know how you drive. At that point, data-sharing contracts between manufacturers/insurance companies become a valuable commodity. I hope that becomes a line item on the purchase agreement.
As for conspiracy-theory stuff about the government shutting down your car, just ignore it - if you're up against a nation-state-level security agency, you've already lost. Why bother hacking into your car when it's just as easy to insert a device to cut your brake lines, or simply abduct you in the middle of the night with a swat team?
Isn't it wonderful to have someone on here who's an expert and knows what he's talking about. As opposed to a load of RUclips influencers that have opinions and thrive on rumour and miss information.. As the man said a load of bollox.😂😂
You obviously don't understand the implications & how just one emergency crisis can flip everything on its head. COVID pandemic was a great example of how laws/regulations were later abused many years after passed. The mechanisms for fixing those abuses is so slow that they have almost no impact in negating or stopping the harms before the govt has utterly screwed you & made you submit to their tyranny. The freedom to move about is one of the most foundational freedoms in a free society. As technology evolves, the integration of the data your car collects about you into a social credit score, used to freeze your bank account, prevent you escaping the country unjustly persecuting you (by shutting off your car; look how they pressured social media to give them direct access for blocking & censoring people from speaking claiming their speech was a threat to public health, etc - they could apply similar pressure to auto manufacturers to give them access into their systems to shutdown your car; look at FISA courts (w/o ability to address the charges against you) which in the US have shown they essentially rubber stamp the gov't request to spy on Americans).
In order for this to happen in the US the government would have to change the definition of what is an automobile. If they were to try to push this agenda without doing so then they would need to get rid of the law mandating the insurance.
Anonymously my arse. If you are the only registered keeper then it's more then likely it's you driving.
There's only ever one registered keeper - it's more a case of who is insured to drive the vehicle. And a business is likely to have a fleet manager who's the registered keeper of all their vehicles.
the breathaliser thing has been used here in the states for probably going on 20 years for the very reason your insurance guru pal suggested, to allow those who have been convicted of drunk driving to commute to work etc. etc.
Let's face it... if you are using a smartphone there is no problem in tracking you now. Will you stop using your smartphone? And personally I think it is rather good if a, for example, drunken person is not allowed to start their car (or motorcycle).
A phone can be turned off or left at home; telematic technology built into vehicles can't be turned off.
Fool. What percentage of the world population are drunken drivers? Come on, it's not even measurable. You're proposing that the masses are put under total surveillance for an absolute minority. They sure have got your mind programmed
Insurance companies are in bussiness to ' Insure'.If they refuse to insure,they are out of bussiness.
Sounds like Demolition Man is coming true....
Thanks!
Thank you Ian! Much appreciated
So it seems that criminals will go back to driving Jaguar mk2s again. 😀
Any time they want you stop doing or owning something, they will just make it so expensive to do so that you “choose” to give it up. If you own a classic car worth millions then you will pay 100k to insure it. If you own a 20k capri you’ll just give it up. This is happing with houses too. It will probably seperate the wheat from the chaff as far as which cars are saved and which cars are scrapped. This to me is very sad as beauty is in the eye of the beholder and there a 1000 ‘s of models of cars which are joyful to own.
There will always be insurance companies that will undercut the giants if they try this tack, believe me. If there isn't a genuine risk, there will always be one insurance company that will buck the trend to get the trade. Same with house prices. People have tried to ride the price rise train and hike their prices up in the wake of COVID, but many areas are now seeing prices dropping, because people vote with their feet and go and buy a house somewhere else that's in their price bracket. Meanwhile, when this inverse trend is reported, people race to sell their house before the price drops too much, causing a glut in the market and lowering prices still faster. Basic market trends.