>Firstly, the entire port of insurance is to spread risk. If the the market for insurance is "too efficient" at determining who is high-risk and who is not, then it is no longer fulfilling its social function.

This might be definitionally correct, but that doesn't mean it's right.

There's no reason you shouldn't rewarded for being a better-than-average driver (or conversely, punished for being worse).

>Maybe you have to commute to your job in heavy stop-and-go traffic with difficult merges.

You don't think we have the technical ability to determine this, to some degree? We have self driving cars for crying out loud.

>If you're driving down a street and a ball bounces out from behind a parked car do you slam on your brakes out of fear that there is a child chasing after it, or do you think that hitting the brakes might make your premiums go up so you just hope that there isn't a child coming.

What a reach.

You hit the brakes, because if there is a child, and you hit them, your premiums will be even higher.