4 ms·

What are you saying? Do you oppose emissions controls because Volkswagen lied? If I rob a bank despite that being against the law, perhaps that makes you thin

What are you saying? Do you oppose emissions controls because Volkswagen lied? If I rob a bank despite that being against the law, perhaps that makes you think bank robbery should be legal.

TylerE 7y ago
I'm saying that we shouldn't make kneejerk bans of things there is no hope of actually enforcing.
- catalogia 7y ago
  Let's drop the bank robbery example since I brought it up and maybe you feel it's an uncharitable example. But you brought up VW's emissions fraud. Do you really believe what they did should be legal, just because they got away with it for years?
  - TylerE 7y ago
    Not especially - although I also feel that they were unfairly villainized because the cars were still WAY cleaner than stuff built the year before the new emissions laws. I'd also note that subsequently just about every other mfger was caught doing variations of the same thing. Vehicle testing (emissions, especially, but MPG also) are highly synthetic measurements that aren't very representative of real world conditions. But to come back to the point at hand - a ban on "facial recognition" is so vague that it doesn't actually accomplish anything - the companies will still do it, they'll just call it something else. "Biometrics", "Posture analysis", "Location monitoring". Historically, government gets tech wrong, and getting it wrong fast just makes the situation worse.
    - Ididntdothis 7y ago
      I was around when the emissions rules were less strict. If you compare the air back then vs today you see quickly that environmental regulations were a big success. Companies fought them tooth and nail at every step but the rules worked.
      - TylerE 7y ago
        Certainly true, but the regulations VW violated went into force in 2009. We're not talking about the smog era.
        Ididntdothis 7y ago
        We still have plenty of unnncessary smog. This is not over.
- simplify 7y ago
  Banning something by law is not just about enforcing it, but also sending a message to the public as to how it should perceived.

What are you saying? Do you oppose emissions controls because Volkswagen lied? If I rob a bank despite that being against the law, perhaps that makes you think bank robbery should be legal.

TylerE 7y ago

I'm saying that we shouldn't make kneejerk bans of things there is no hope of actually enforcing.

catalogia 7y ago
Let's drop the bank robbery example since I brought it up and maybe you feel it's an uncharitable example. But you brought up VW's emissions fraud. Do you really believe what they did should be legal, just because they got away with it for years?
- TylerE 7y ago
  Not especially - although I also feel that they were unfairly villainized because the cars were still WAY cleaner than stuff built the year before the new emissions laws. I'd also note that subsequently just about every other mfger was caught doing variations of the same thing. Vehicle testing (emissions, especially, but MPG also) are highly synthetic measurements that aren't very representative of real world conditions. But to come back to the point at hand - a ban on "facial recognition" is so vague that it doesn't actually accomplish anything - the companies will still do it, they'll just call it something else. "Biometrics", "Posture analysis", "Location monitoring". Historically, government gets tech wrong, and getting it wrong fast just makes the situation worse.
  - Ididntdothis 7y ago
    I was around when the emissions rules were less strict. If you compare the air back then vs today you see quickly that environmental regulations were a big success. Companies fought them tooth and nail at every step but the rules worked.
    - TylerE 7y ago
      Certainly true, but the regulations VW violated went into force in 2009. We're not talking about the smog era.
      - Ididntdothis 7y ago
        We still have plenty of unnncessary smog. This is not over.
simplify 7y ago
Banning something by law is not just about enforcing it, but also sending a message to the public as to how it should perceived.