My brake pads are also better than average, my brake fluid is changed several times a year (instead of never in the average vehicle). Braking hard consistently allows me to keep track of the condition of my brakes.

Insurance agents have no power, desire, or ability to adjust your rates. All they can do is input data into a computer. And they can only input data that the computer is programmed to receive. Sure there are plenty of people out there who think they can drive better than they can. That's why you shouldn't take their word for it. A racing competition license or even records of driver's education from an actual sanctioned automotive organization would be sufficient for evidence of superior driver skill. Far more so than the certificate of completion from Bob's Defensive Driving Academy where they tell you to follow the speed limit religiously and accelerate slowly.

Also, don't expect HR to follow their own company policies or the integrity department to review the circumstances of your BS firings. They won't... They also won't tell your former co-workers why you aren't there. Lack of information is their friend.

Yes indeed. That's what happened to me. A "safety violation" when you get back from a work trip leaves you jobless and without benefits... Don't spend a lot of time thinking about getting a new job. When you decide it isn't working out, find something else, don't do what I did and make an elaborate plan to quit on a certain day next year and then take a nice vacation.

I could care less about the privacy, I get upset that they record the data that is easy to get rather than data that is actually related to safe driving. Sure braking force and cornering acceleration are things an accelerometer can easily and reliably measure data, but they have nothing to do with safe driving... These things don't record the things that are dangerous such as not using headlights and blinkers, weaving through traffic, tailgating, running red lights, driving down the wrong side of the road, eating/texting/having sex while driving, having a car with bald tires, and all of the other general asshatery that we all see and isn't private, but are things that are not factored in to insurance.

When insurance gives me a discount for having a manual transmission (know how to drive, have to anticipate actions farther in advance, extra theft protection), having high performance tires (greater grip, shorter stopping distance), having extra safety items in my car (roll bar, first aid kit, fire extinguisher), or having extra driving education (sure an online 20 minute "defensive driving" course can get you a discount, but competition track license doesn't). Then maybe I will consider letting them track my driving habits to reduce my insurance costs.

Until then, they charge us all based on the biggest idiots of the group and then offer discounts for things that make them more money: bundling (which doesn't reduce risk), tracking (which they can sell the data for), and longevity (loyal customers).

The problem with that is that this device and insurance in general doesn't factor in driver ability. Sure I brake harder and later than the general driving population and I corner like my car is on rails. But 1) I actually have a decent amount of race track experience where I actually AM controlling the car at the absolute limits, 2) I never come close to those limits on the street, 3) I maintain my car significantly better than the average vehicle on the road, 4) I have far better tires than the average vehicle on the road, and 5) I have a much lighter and easier to control car [Miata WOOHOO] than the average car on the road.

However none of my 5 points factor in on insurance. Why would I let them track me to see that my car brakes harder and corners faster than the average car if they won't factor in the driving abilities and vehicular factors that make me safer than the average driver?

You can't be charged extra for pre-existing conditions, but they can exclude medications from coverage to treat said pre-existing condition... Ask me how I know.

Not to mention that if Rainier decides to blow its top, a good amount of the area around Seattle will be pretty fucked.

Most people didn't transition to XP until they were forced to by Microsoft killing off 2K. Windows 2000 was where all the power users were until you had to upgrade directx (limited to XP only) or they stopped doing security updates. By then XP was equivalent to 2000 in usability.

Admission was cheap, however they also forced you to buy a pass to visit their bullshit aliens exhibit which was extremely pricey for having no scientific or factual content whatsoever...

Based on that logic, the whole Apollo program was a waste. My point is that each of those missions were tests of procedures needed to actually land a man on the moon. It's not a waste to go there, orbit, conduct mission critical tests, and return to ensure the success of a future landing.

Do you have a different gear box? 5 speed Miatas are gear limited at 125...

Maybe if you don't factor in that almost all race cars that do Pikes Peak have turbochargers that are capable of shoving more air in the cylinders than they can handle.

Yeah, Apollo 8, 9, and 10 were such a waste. Should have landed the first time we went to the moon.

Yes, because Apollo 8, 9, and 10 were all a complete waste...

I just think it's absurd to postulate that climate change will have detrimental affects when we are already managing to convert a desert climate into an agricultural center. Humans artificially change the environment. The fact that we are artificially changing the climate with CO2 doesn't change the fact that we will adapt the local conditions to serve our needs too.