4 ms·

I'm sorry, but this is bullshit. Their privacy policy states they share personally identifiable information with third parties only with consent. Their entire b

I'm sorry, but this is bullshit. Their privacy policy states they share personally identifiable information with third parties only with consent. Their entire business model is the exact opposite. They reason the site and app exists is to share personally identifiable information with third parties without consent. This is nothing but vigilantism.

artmageddon 16y ago
Good point on vigilantism, but I think it's more than that. This whole scheme smacks of grade school tattle-tailing with the worst of everything about red-light cameras. You can't face your accuser, and there's no frazzled teacher who you can tell your side of the story to defend yourself with. It's a seriously flawed system and I hope no insurance companies adopt it.
- bryanlarsen 16y ago
  Yes, but school ground bullies don't kill thousands of people per year, unlike bad drivers. And compared to some of the predictors that insurance companies currently use (age, sex, income, marital status), number of complaints seems like a much better predictor to me.
  - alex_c 16y ago
    The other predictors may not feel fair, but they're much more difficult to abuse or misuse than this scheme. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who uses this app should probably have their insurance raised much more than any individual drivers who are reported.
  - ktsmith 16y ago
    If another driver around you is breaking a law dial 911 if it's an emergency (drunken driving) or the non emergency number if it's small (littering). In the first case you should let the police deal with it and in the second you need to be able to positively identify the driver and be willing to show up in court. You can do this today and don't need to have an iphone app that bypasses legal channels and the the other drivers right to due process.
natrius 16y ago
There is no contradiction there. They (presumably) don't share information about their users with third parties.
jamesaguilar 16y ago
I assume they mean the private personal information of the _user_, which is different than the PII of the target. Also I feel I must again correct this misconception that mere reporting of violations of the law is somehow equivalent to unauthorized meting out of punishment for lawbreaking. Vigilantism and reporting crimes are two different things.
- ktsmith 16y ago
  How is reporting a supposed violation to someones insurance company or the dmv for the purpose or raising their rates without law enforcement involvement or due process being available for the other driver not vigilantism?
  - jamesaguilar 16y ago
    For one thing, vigilantism itself describes illegal enforcement of the law. This is not illegal. On another level, vigilantism need not be exactly but does tend to invoke an image of physical force used in the punishing of crimes. Finally, as a technical matter, the reporter of the violation is not enforcing a law against someone, just legally transmitting information about the person's behavior. Vigilantism involves the enforcement of laws against the victim.
    - ktsmith 16y ago
      If the intention of sending this information to the DMV and insurance companies rather than law enforcement is designed to effect enforcement of the law via a rise in insurance rates for the offender without involving law enforcement or due process then that would seem to meet the definition of vigilantism you have provided.
      - jamesaguilar 16y ago
        I guess I just don't believe the legal transmission of factual information can ever properly be labeled "vigilantism," especially when its recipient is a legal authority or someone who might be liable for the bad behavior reported. Is informing an employer of an employee's unsafe driving vigilantism? Because the actors in that case have analogous financial and moral roles as the ones in this.

artmageddon 16y ago

Good point on vigilantism, but I think it's more than that. This whole scheme smacks of grade school tattle-tailing with the worst of everything about red-light cameras. You can't face your accuser, and there's no frazzled teacher who you can tell your side of the story to defend yourself with. It's a seriously flawed system and I hope no insurance companies adopt it.

bryanlarsen 16y ago
Yes, but school ground bullies don't kill thousands of people per year, unlike bad drivers. And compared to some of the predictors that insurance companies currently use (age, sex, income, marital status), number of complaints seems like a much better predictor to me.
- alex_c 16y ago
  The other predictors may not feel fair, but they're much more difficult to abuse or misuse than this scheme. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who uses this app should probably have their insurance raised much more than any individual drivers who are reported.
- ktsmith 16y ago
  If another driver around you is breaking a law dial 911 if it's an emergency (drunken driving) or the non emergency number if it's small (littering). In the first case you should let the police deal with it and in the second you need to be able to positively identify the driver and be willing to show up in court. You can do this today and don't need to have an iphone app that bypasses legal channels and the the other drivers right to due process.

natrius 16y ago

There is no contradiction there. They (presumably) don't share information about their users with third parties.

jamesaguilar 16y ago

I assume they mean the private personal information of the _user_, which is different than the PII of the target. Also I feel I must again correct this misconception that mere reporting of violations of the law is somehow equivalent to unauthorized meting out of punishment for lawbreaking. Vigilantism and reporting crimes are two different things.

ktsmith 16y ago
How is reporting a supposed violation to someones insurance company or the dmv for the purpose or raising their rates without law enforcement involvement or due process being available for the other driver not vigilantism?
- jamesaguilar 16y ago
  For one thing, vigilantism itself describes illegal enforcement of the law. This is not illegal. On another level, vigilantism need not be exactly but does tend to invoke an image of physical force used in the punishing of crimes. Finally, as a technical matter, the reporter of the violation is not enforcing a law against someone, just legally transmitting information about the person's behavior. Vigilantism involves the enforcement of laws against the victim.
  - ktsmith 16y ago
    If the intention of sending this information to the DMV and insurance companies rather than law enforcement is designed to effect enforcement of the law via a rise in insurance rates for the offender without involving law enforcement or due process then that would seem to meet the definition of vigilantism you have provided.
    - jamesaguilar 16y ago
      I guess I just don't believe the legal transmission of factual information can ever properly be labeled "vigilantism," especially when its recipient is a legal authority or someone who might be liable for the bad behavior reported. Is informing an employer of an employee's unsafe driving vigilantism? Because the actors in that case have analogous financial and moral roles as the ones in this.