4 ms·

Because Amazon + cameras + AI + sensationalism = clicks? To me, the idea of an algorithm which detects when a driver is at increased risk (e.g. drowsy, or not

by mft_ 6y ago

Because Amazon + cameras + AI + sensationalism = clicks? To me, the idea of an algorithm which detects when a driver is at increased risk (e.g. drowsy, or not wearing a seatbelt, or maybe using a phone inappropriately) seems like a fundamentally good move. And makes basic sense in any vehicle still piloted by a human. The issue is that (of course) people being watched by a camera opens the potential of misuse, and so (as ever) people jump to worse-case scenarios and start using emotionally-loaded words like ‘dystopian’. Of course, we don’t know for sure if it will be misused, and/or dystopian, until it’s actually implemented and we have observed results... but people do like to get upset and sensationalise just about anything that’s a new idea, these days.

EarlKing 6y ago
So you're going to be perfectly OK with people monitoring your vehicle 24/7 for how much you actually use the public roads, right? Because that won't be abused either. And that, by the way, is a perennial suggestion that got floated again recently. How about setting aside whether this is useful and consider that maybe it's blatantly anti-labor? They can already monitor who's wearing a seatbelt or not with vehicle telemetry. Adding this on top of their existing monitoring apparatus is sociopathic.
- mft_ 6y ago
  > So you're going to be perfectly OK with people monitoring your vehicle 24/7 for how much you actually use the public roads, right? Because that won't be abused either. And that, by the way, is a perennial suggestion that got floated again recently. Well, I'm not sure that that's got anything to do with this particular issue, but since you asked... I think payment of road tax according to road usage is eminently sensible, and much fairer than a flat tax applied to people irrespective of whether they drive 5k or 50k miles per year. So yes, I'd be fine with GPS monitoring of my road usage, if the end was sensible and it wasn't abused by the governmental apparatus that would (probably) implement it. > How about setting aside whether this is useful and consider that maybe it's blatantly anti-labor? Is it, fundamentally? Is it any worse than making people clock in or out of a workplace, or setting performance goals? I don't know - I'd be interested to hear your argument. > They can already monitor who's wearing a seatbelt or not with vehicle telemetry. Sure... but not tiredness, or inattention, or other risky behaviours like eating or texting at the wheel. > Adding this on top of their existing monitoring apparatus is sociopathic. What are you referring to, here?
  - alacombe 6y ago
    > I think payment of road tax according to road usage is eminently sensible That's what fuel taxes were for
developer92 6y ago
The trouble with waiting to see is that once you've discovered that it is being abused, the system is already in place and hard to remove. Additionally, it's a kind of frog boiling situation where the more such systems you have the more acceptable further such systems and abuses are both in the comment and socially.
oceanplexian 6y ago
> To me, the idea of an algorithm which detects when a driver is at increased risk (e.g. drowsy, or not wearing a seatbelt, or maybe using a phone inappropriately) seems like a fundamentally good move. And makes basic sense in any vehicle still piloted by a human. I have a counter proposal. How about instead of trying to micromanage employees, companies raise the hiring bar? If you don't want people working for you who break the rules, pay them well, and create a culture of inclusion and safety. I hear exactly the same complaints from friends involved in manufacturing where employees are constantly doing drugs on shift, showing up late, and abusing the system. Well what the heck did you expect? You pay them $10-15 per hour and treat them like they are replaceable robots rather than people. Of course they are going to screw you over.
- mft_ 6y ago
  (Late coming back to this, but) I totally agree with you. My original comment was addressing the sensationalism applied to an idea... because it was associated with Amazon and/or AI and/or cameras, etc. I wasn't for a moment intending to support Amazon's overall approach to its employees. That said, it doesn't have to either/or: I still think that such algorithms (if they work sufficiently well) make sense to be used in any vehicle (commercial or private, Amazon or otherwise) piloted by a human, given obvious human weaknesses & variability, and the damage that badly-driven vehicles can do.
AniseAbyss 6y ago
Honestly at some point a tired Amazon driver is going to mow down a bunch of innocent schoolgirls and the issue will be settled. Its how driving intoxicated became a felony.

by mft_ 6y ago

EarlKing 6y ago

So you're going to be perfectly OK with people monitoring your vehicle 24/7 for how much you actually use the public roads, right? Because that won't be abused either. And that, by the way, is a perennial suggestion that got floated again recently. How about setting aside whether this is useful and consider that maybe it's blatantly anti-labor? They can already monitor who's wearing a seatbelt or not with vehicle telemetry. Adding this on top of their existing monitoring apparatus is sociopathic.

mft_ 6y ago
> So you're going to be perfectly OK with people monitoring your vehicle 24/7 for how much you actually use the public roads, right? Because that won't be abused either. And that, by the way, is a perennial suggestion that got floated again recently. Well, I'm not sure that that's got anything to do with this particular issue, but since you asked... I think payment of road tax according to road usage is eminently sensible, and much fairer than a flat tax applied to people irrespective of whether they drive 5k or 50k miles per year. So yes, I'd be fine with GPS monitoring of my road usage, if the end was sensible and it wasn't abused by the governmental apparatus that would (probably) implement it. > How about setting aside whether this is useful and consider that maybe it's blatantly anti-labor? Is it, fundamentally? Is it any worse than making people clock in or out of a workplace, or setting performance goals? I don't know - I'd be interested to hear your argument. > They can already monitor who's wearing a seatbelt or not with vehicle telemetry. Sure... but not tiredness, or inattention, or other risky behaviours like eating or texting at the wheel. > Adding this on top of their existing monitoring apparatus is sociopathic. What are you referring to, here?
- alacombe 6y ago
  > I think payment of road tax according to road usage is eminently sensible That's what fuel taxes were for

developer92 6y ago

The trouble with waiting to see is that once you've discovered that it is being abused, the system is already in place and hard to remove. Additionally, it's a kind of frog boiling situation where the more such systems you have the more acceptable further such systems and abuses are both in the comment and socially.

oceanplexian 6y ago

> To me, the idea of an algorithm which detects when a driver is at increased risk (e.g. drowsy, or not wearing a seatbelt, or maybe using a phone inappropriately) seems like a fundamentally good move. And makes basic sense in any vehicle still piloted by a human. I have a counter proposal. How about instead of trying to micromanage employees, companies raise the hiring bar? If you don't want people working for you who break the rules, pay them well, and create a culture of inclusion and safety. I hear exactly the same complaints from friends involved in manufacturing where employees are constantly doing drugs on shift, showing up late, and abusing the system. Well what the heck did you expect? You pay them $10-15 per hour and treat them like they are replaceable robots rather than people. Of course they are going to screw you over.

mft_ 6y ago
(Late coming back to this, but) I totally agree with you. My original comment was addressing the sensationalism applied to an idea... because it was associated with Amazon and/or AI and/or cameras, etc. I wasn't for a moment intending to support Amazon's overall approach to its employees. That said, it doesn't have to either/or: I still think that such algorithms (if they work sufficiently well) make sense to be used in any vehicle (commercial or private, Amazon or otherwise) piloted by a human, given obvious human weaknesses & variability, and the damage that badly-driven vehicles can do.

AniseAbyss 6y ago

Honestly at some point a tired Amazon driver is going to mow down a bunch of innocent schoolgirls and the issue will be settled. Its how driving intoxicated became a felony.