You're not against the insurance company. Your decision is relatively separate from theirs.
Given I’m unable to produce the probabilities necessary to compute the Kelly criterion, I can’t use that to make the decision. Instead, I have to use dumb heuristics like “I need liability insurance to get rid of my risk of ruin” or “I can easily afford to replace my car, but my passion is parking underneath dead trees during storms, so I should pay for comprehensive coverage.”
In either case I have no idea how to compute the probabilities, but I’m still pretty sure I made the right decision.
The value of insurance to the buyer depends on the buyer's wealth. The insurance the electronics store offers on the tablet I buy is well-priced for their target audience but not for someone with my emergency expense buffer.
Could work! I don't know how, though.
I think I really can sometimes tell if I’m riskier or safer than the average person. I can observe other people’s behavior and compare it to mine. But even then, my impressions will be subject to a lot of biases (eg. everyone thinks they are an above-average driver).
If I assume the insurance company has done the math so they make a decent margin, and if I’m confident I’m a better or worse risk, it’s possible I can use that reasoning to guess whether insurance is a good value for me.