9A Testing the Hypothesis, Part 2

Who: After interviewing different people and listening to their opinions concerning my idea, I understood that there might be a case where certain passengers don't fall inside the boundaries. One example an interviewee said was the bus riders. Even though they also may have the unmet need for road security, they ride the bus because is a robust, more secure transport service(while they are not exactly seeing the road). Also, if we imagine more secure public transportation like the subway, there is no need for a security camera reporting reckless driving.

What: An interviewee also brought up the fact that there could be more traffic light cameras in intersections so they could be reported directly to the police with a system that is already up. After a lot of thought and with the opinion of my third interviewee, we decided to segregate that solution since the infrastructure of placing more cameras increased a lot the cost of the whole idea. Also, people drive reckless not only in the intersections but everywhere, hence why the app would be active every time you activate it on a phone with a camera that almost everybody already has, all recording in a 10 dollar phone holder in your dashboard.

Why: Because they feel some public transportation is more secure or they feel is out of their hands if something happen.

Inside the boundary	Outside the boundary
Who is in: Everyday drivers, pedestrians.	Who is out: Passengers of somewhat secure public transportation.
What the Need Is: Feeling secure on the road.	What the Need Is Not: Reporting through cameras in a stationary place like traffic lights.
Why the Need Exists: Because of numerous reckless drivers that don't suffer the consequences.	Alternative Explanations: Increase of cost due to infrastructure and not providing enough security.