The main cost of a traffic ticket today isn't the ticket; it's the (much larger) uptick in insurance costs afterwards. If you could just pay $80-120 on the off chance you occasionally got a ticket, without impacting insurance premiums, I'd speed a lot more often.
It's a social anti-credit system.
But one can dream :) A good thought technology for reducing anger towards reckless drivers is to assume the crazy BMW driver just had a bad case of diarrhea and needed to get to a bathroom very fast.
Thing is, doing this will get you in a shit storm so that might be the simple reason no insurtech has tried it yet. Perhaps some smaller insurers are doing it and keeping their mouth shut. No problem if nobody knows where the license plates on the exclusion list are based upon.
Innocent until proven guilty, not Innocent until some grainy youtube footage that kinda maybe looks like you were speeding. Police equipment is calibrated and the evidence stored appropriately for a reason.
That said, at least the in the UK, the police do use video footage from the public to a certain degree. I believe this is often used to go and "have a quiet word" with the driver in question, i.e.: <unexpected knock knock on the front door> "Was this you sir/madam? <shows video on smartphone of sir/madam driving dangerously>" and then give them a warning if they own up to it (...and this sort of intervention is probably enough to on its own without having to go any further, i.e. having a police officer standing on your doorstep with video footage of you driving like a prick and being able to "get away with" just a warning/telling off), but I do not believe that the footage on its own is enough evidence on its own since it is so easy to fake.
Is this ever a real concern with CCTV footage?
But sure, a dashcam won't necessarily ID the driver, just the car.
That's quite general problem around deepfakes - how to generate video that's guaranteed real. Some form of DRM or blackchain is probably needed, not to anyones liking.
Typically happens with family members.
Even if it is stolen it works, as you would obviously file a police report for the theft and so that would indemnify you of any crimes committed from when it was stolen.
The only issue is what happens if your bookkeeper gets drunk, borrows your car (because they know where you keep the keys) and then commits a crime?
I would be curious to see how/if it brings down speeding if they don't get a choice at all but just have to wait. It's not very practical but I do think it would work in principle.
I think this pilot is giving people a choice, but any actual implementation would not.
For the average person, this info is probably stored in a basement near a beware of the leopard sign but insurance companies will go through the trouble to get it.
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/03/finland...
Punishing with micro-timeouts like this is much more interesting imo.
> Estonians have praised the idea for being more egalitarian—monetary fines are not adjusted according to income, as in neighbouring Finland, but everyone has the same number of hours in the day
Back when I worked in food service, being an hour late probably meant today was your last day. Now, I'm not sure anyone would actually notice. Higher up, if you're late, people will wait for you.
If a 1-hour timeout creates a split between "so I lost my job" and "so I finished an hour later", it's still punishing the poor more.
also known as, a strawman.
Also I've recently bought new car and collected 3 fines within first 2 weeks. They weren't quick enough to arrive to change my behaviour and this would've bitten me way too hard than it should.
Just make fines progressive.
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/18/771371881/episode-945-the-lib...