4 ms·
Care to explain how you can insure a car without the insurance selling your data to data brokers? All states with remotely private registration still require in
by nullc 2mo ago
Care to explain how you can insure a car without the insurance selling your data to data brokers? All states with remotely private registration still require insurance, including Montana.
- mannanj 2mo agoSure. Insurance isn't asking for your vehicle registration though, and is not even getting your license plate. You are not being tracked by flock cameras and your license plate linked to your identity through your insurance registration. You are though, through your state registration at the DMV. Unless, of course, you have Montana registrations.
- nullc 2mo agoInsurance demands your vin and reports it to LexisNexis, and anyone with a Lexis Nexis account can turn a VIN into a Montana plate so long as they self-certify that their use complies with the DPPA (which includes enough reasons to drive two busses through, even if you want to assume bad actors don't lie).
- mannanj 2mo agoSo what's your argument or point here? I am arguing that a Montana registration, with registration under an LLC and not you, with insurance even where the vehicle's vin is tied to your name, as a driver of the vehicle (not owner), is still more privacy protection and better for you in reference to Flock privacy-invading-cameras than an in-state registration where it's directly registered under you. Seems your whole post may fall under my original "Straw Man" camp that I was referring to. edit: And the whole "bad actors lie" comment feels to me like a bad faith, Ad hominem style statement that attacks credibility rather than substance.
- nullc 2mo agoSorry to offend, my point is that the necessity of auto insurance will stick your name (as the insured party for that vin) in a place accessible to flock (or at least flock's users). And as such I don't think it provides the results your post suggested "Montana vehicle registrations give you privacy". I really wish it did and I hoped you had some solution!
- mannanj 2mo agoAh. I understand now. Thank you for clarifying. And my bad too for assuming bad faith there and/or projecting onto you. I don’t want to believe it’s true that you compromise privacy by registering a vehicle under your name, particularly in regards to flock. I admit you could be right, but I want to investigate this more. Do you think it’s possible there could be car insurance agencies that offer you privacy protection of some sort or that there’s another way to keep yourself private? Some ideas I have: - get a cheaper vehicle and get it insurance coverage from the company or someone else - get yourself insurance for another car, and get the coverage for Liability ie to protect the other persons car if you hit someone else and don’t worry about your own car. For example; a $5k car pays for itself after 1-2 years of no significant claims and now you have what your insurance would have offered for your car anyway. (“The cost of privacy”.) - I am not convinced your insurance company would data sharing with flock or its subsidiaries if they only have your vin. What are your data sources for this? Edit: as a legitimate need; perhaps the market will reveal itself large enough to surface an insurance company that offers privacy protection and refuses flock data sharing. However just because this could true that insurance companies would share with flock today, doesn’t mean it is.
- nullc 2mo agoBroad form car insurance might accomplish what you want: https://www.policygenius.com/auto-insurance/what-is-broad-form-car-insurance/ https://www.policygenius.com/auto-insurance/what-is-broad-fo... But I believe the intersection of states with highly private registration and where broad form is available is the empty set. > I am not convinced your insurance company would data sharing with flock or its subsidiaries if they only have your vin. Go pull your lexis nexis report.