4 ms·

You can pay someone, who has no objections to implemented safety measures, to provide you with transportation services.

ehnto 5y ago
You are being unempathetic and dismissive to the issues it raises, that is not a solution to the problem raised, nor is "Just don't drive". This isn't about the specific safety measure in question, the issue is invasive technology mandates in personal vehicles potentially excluding people from driving due to a desire to not be tracked by technology companies and government services. Imagine if they mandated the same thing on your smartphone. The answer could be "Don't use a smartphone", but that's obviously not an inclusive option. "Be tracked or exclude yourself from the modern world" is simply not a fair way to approach issues like this. Consider as well that the US has built a society heavily based around personal car usage, towns and cities are built around it, jobs and education expect it of you. So you are born into a car-first society, but then given the ultimatum of tracking and monitoring or reduced freedom of movement.
- helge9210 5y ago
  > potentially excluding people from driving Apparently here we have different understanding. Everyone by default is excluded from driving. Driving a vehicle is not a right, it is a privilege, granted only to those who are willing to receive training, are able to pass test and are ready to operate vehicle that conforms to regulations. If vehicle is not within regulations limit it may not leave private property.
  - ehnto 5y ago
    I don't believe driving a vehicle is a right. I agree with you on all points in this comment. I do believe everyone should have equal opportunity to prove they can drive a road legal vehicle safely, and a they should be able to do that without the metrics of their journeys forever after being recorded by technology companies, and the safe operation of their car being decided by technology devices watching them drive. I think you just don't agree with that. Just imagine it. Machine learning algorithms deciding whether you're drunk or not, and stopping your car from moving if it thinks you are. What could possibly go wrong?
    - helge9210 5y ago
      > What could possibly go wrong? Car would stop in the middle of the Death Valley and will refuse to start or to open the doors. In more realistic scenario, the system would notify the driver and the police which have an option to send someone to actually check the driver condition. This allows to deal with stuck driving and to improve algorithm accuracy.
- helge9210 5y ago
  > So you are born You can vote or you can leave.
  - ehnto 5y ago
    I don't think the average person has much agency here, telling them to leave the country is callous, and a bit misunderstanding.
    - helge9210 5y ago
      As a person, who twice moved countries in the last decade for political reasons I don't relate to this.
      - ehnto 5y ago
        Well I admire your tenacity. Most people wouldn't do that.

You are being unempathetic and dismissive to the issues it raises, that is not a solution to the problem raised, nor is "Just don't drive". This isn't about the specific safety measure in question, the issue is invasive technology mandates in personal vehicles potentially excluding people from driving due to a desire to not be tracked by technology companies and government services. Imagine if they mandated the same thing on your smartphone. The answer could be "Don't use a smartphone", but that's obviously not an inclusive option. "Be tracked or exclude yourself from the modern world" is simply not a fair way to approach issues like this. Consider as well that the US has built a society heavily based around personal car usage, towns and cities are built around it, jobs and education expect it of you. So you are born into a car-first society, but then given the ultimatum of tracking and monitoring or reduced freedom of movement.

helge9210 5y ago
> potentially excluding people from driving Apparently here we have different understanding. Everyone by default is excluded from driving. Driving a vehicle is not a right, it is a privilege, granted only to those who are willing to receive training, are able to pass test and are ready to operate vehicle that conforms to regulations. If vehicle is not within regulations limit it may not leave private property.
- ehnto 5y ago
  I don't believe driving a vehicle is a right. I agree with you on all points in this comment. I do believe everyone should have equal opportunity to prove they can drive a road legal vehicle safely, and a they should be able to do that without the metrics of their journeys forever after being recorded by technology companies, and the safe operation of their car being decided by technology devices watching them drive. I think you just don't agree with that. Just imagine it. Machine learning algorithms deciding whether you're drunk or not, and stopping your car from moving if it thinks you are. What could possibly go wrong?
  - helge9210 5y ago
    > What could possibly go wrong? Car would stop in the middle of the Death Valley and will refuse to start or to open the doors. In more realistic scenario, the system would notify the driver and the police which have an option to send someone to actually check the driver condition. This allows to deal with stuck driving and to improve algorithm accuracy.
helge9210 5y ago
> So you are born You can vote or you can leave.
- ehnto 5y ago
  I don't think the average person has much agency here, telling them to leave the country is callous, and a bit misunderstanding.
  - helge9210 5y ago
    As a person, who twice moved countries in the last decade for political reasons I don't relate to this.
    - ehnto 5y ago
      Well I admire your tenacity. Most people wouldn't do that.