|
|
|
Risks
|
|
Data aggregators get
sufficient data from other personal data sources directly over wireless
internet. In that case they would not
need, and might not use, connected vehicle to obtain the data putting at risk
any investment in a Core System.
|
|
Risk to personal
Privacy may be a deterrent.
|
|
Insufficient
coverage in the early years may not make it worth while.
|
|
Other
Considerations
|
|
|
|
Owner/Operator
versus Participator
|
|
Participating in a
Core System provides access to an open market to buy and sell vehicle-based
data.
|
|
Ownership of a Core
System provides control of the data processing and distribution. This would enable proprietary handling of
the data and lowers risk in the data supply.
|
|
May also allow
better regional or national coverage than relying on many State and local
Core Systems.
|
|
|
|
Privacy
Implication
|
|
The privacy
protection the Core System provides to data providers can be seen as a
benefit or a deterrent to data aggregation companies. Current data aggregation business models
rely on personal information acquired without consent that is truly informed
or technically coerced (eg., requirement to allow harvesting your iPhone
address book and tracking of your phone calls to use the Google transit
application). On the other hand, a
backlash via privacy legislation in Congress or consumer actions (protests,
social media campaigns, boycotts, etc.) might be mitigated by turning to
connected vehicle data. It is not
clear at this time how privacy will manifest itself in this user case.
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
Questions
|
|
What are the
sustainable business models for data aggregators that use or own a Core
System and for the data consumers that are their customers?
|
