5 ms·

Amazon driver quits over company's new AI-powered truck cameras

36 points by hbcondo714 6y ago

ckdarby 6y ago
I know someone who used to be an Amazon driver similar to Vic in this article. They also left over this same issue but the real reason they explained to me was nothing to do with privacy but it prevented them from running their side gig while driving. They had a second phone and were fielding calls while driving as a real estate agent and they couldn't do that with cameras.
throwawaysea 6y ago
This seems like a step too far and I don’t want to see such invasions of privacy normalized. It’s bad enough to see the recent disturbing trend of companies policing employees’ speech and politics on their personal time.
- cecja 6y ago
  Eh... there is a hard difference between policing speech and finding the speech so abhorrent that you don't want to work with the individual who spoke it anymore. There was crazy shit going on during the last election where I had to put 2-3 people out of my life because they just went a bit to insane.
imwillofficial 6y ago
“Stuff that doesn’t matter for $400, Alex”
Crosseye_Jack 6y ago
And Netradyne ain’t shy about it. > By capturing and analyzing every second of driving time, the Driveri® vision-based safety solution provides unmatched visibility to fleet performance. Though what gets me is the line > If we can save one life, it’s worth it. I don’t agree. There is a point where privacy outweighs life saving. Otherwise, let’s put cameras in toilets just in case some slips and falls, let’s just put ankle monitors on everyone just in case they have a accident and need medical help. Oh ignore that fact that it’s always recording what you do and wear you do it. Here have a gamificated app to take your mind off things. Oh look your 4th in safety rating across your street… Drivers should be driving. They should have their attention on the road and roads are dangerous places. But I feel that Amazon have done more harm than good in that regard when you hear stories about their “contractor van driving partners” peeing in bottles in the van because stopping for a break is too costly for them. Although we are pretty much already there anyways. Almost every company owned van I know of has fleet management devices monitoring location and driving behaviour, and more recently every one of these vans have dashcams running 24/7 even if it’s for use case of catching the number plate of the car that did cause the accident / prove it wasn’t the van drivers fault (not sure how many of these vans also have a camera looking into the cab). So while I dislike this idea, it also feels like just another battle in a war we have already lost as the van in question is a Amazon owned and branded van.
dchuk 6y ago
I make software for the heavy duty trucking industry. These systems are very common in fleets, and they aren’t really privacy invading in my opinion, since they watch you when you’re driving, which is when you’re working, and it’s watching to make sure you are alert and focused on the road. Considering how insanely dangerous tractor trailers are, all the rest of us driving on the road should be thankful for stuff like this. Last thing anyone needs is a distracted semi driver. Now that being said, if this is a contractor for Amazon, that can obviously be problematic…
- treesprite82 6y ago
  Do you see no issue with normalising the constant recording and analysing of an employee's face and body, then having them sign a contract that allows that data to be shared/sold arbitrarily to third parties? > all the rest of us driving on the road should be thankful for stuff like this. Last thing anyone needs is a distracted semi driver There are ways for Amazon to improve safety without invading privacy. For example a couple of years ago they considered a 5-day training course, but vetoed it because they saw it as a bottleneck to expansion. Drivers also report near-impossible delivery quotas that force them to skip breaks and engage in riskier driving. I think this choice should be seen as trading off privacy for profit, not for safety.

36 points by hbcondo714 6y ago

I know someone who used to be an Amazon driver similar to Vic in this article. They also left over this same issue but the real reason they explained to me was nothing to do with privacy but it prevented them from running their side gig while driving. They had a second phone and were fielding calls while driving as a real estate agent and they couldn't do that with cameras.

throwawaysea 6y ago

This seems like a step too far and I don’t want to see such invasions of privacy normalized. It’s bad enough to see the recent disturbing trend of companies policing employees’ speech and politics on their personal time.

cecja 6y ago
Eh... there is a hard difference between policing speech and finding the speech so abhorrent that you don't want to work with the individual who spoke it anymore. There was crazy shit going on during the last election where I had to put 2-3 people out of my life because they just went a bit to insane.

imwillofficial 6y ago

“Stuff that doesn’t matter for $400, Alex”

Crosseye_Jack 6y ago

And Netradyne ain’t shy about it. > By capturing and analyzing every second of driving time, the Driveri® vision-based safety solution provides unmatched visibility to fleet performance. Though what gets me is the line > If we can save one life, it’s worth it. I don’t agree. There is a point where privacy outweighs life saving. Otherwise, let’s put cameras in toilets just in case some slips and falls, let’s just put ankle monitors on everyone just in case they have a accident and need medical help. Oh ignore that fact that it’s always recording what you do and wear you do it. Here have a gamificated app to take your mind off things. Oh look your 4th in safety rating across your street… Drivers should be driving. They should have their attention on the road and roads are dangerous places. But I feel that Amazon have done more harm than good in that regard when you hear stories about their “contractor van driving partners” peeing in bottles in the van because stopping for a break is too costly for them. Although we are pretty much already there anyways. Almost every company owned van I know of has fleet management devices monitoring location and driving behaviour, and more recently every one of these vans have dashcams running 24/7 even if it’s for use case of catching the number plate of the car that did cause the accident / prove it wasn’t the van drivers fault (not sure how many of these vans also have a camera looking into the cab). So while I dislike this idea, it also feels like just another battle in a war we have already lost as the van in question is a Amazon owned and branded van.

dchuk 6y ago

I make software for the heavy duty trucking industry. These systems are very common in fleets, and they aren’t really privacy invading in my opinion, since they watch you when you’re driving, which is when you’re working, and it’s watching to make sure you are alert and focused on the road. Considering how insanely dangerous tractor trailers are, all the rest of us driving on the road should be thankful for stuff like this. Last thing anyone needs is a distracted semi driver. Now that being said, if this is a contractor for Amazon, that can obviously be problematic…

treesprite82 6y ago
Do you see no issue with normalising the constant recording and analysing of an employee's face and body, then having them sign a contract that allows that data to be shared/sold arbitrarily to third parties? > all the rest of us driving on the road should be thankful for stuff like this. Last thing anyone needs is a distracted semi driver There are ways for Amazon to improve safety without invading privacy. For example a couple of years ago they considered a 5-day training course, but vetoed it because they saw it as a bottleneck to expansion. Drivers also report near-impossible delivery quotas that force them to skip breaks and engage in riskier driving. I think this choice should be seen as trading off privacy for profit, not for safety.