5 ms·

Maybe because the automated enforcement can easily be applied for unexpected goals. In the US, many red light cameras are operated by private companies that are

Maybe because the automated enforcement can easily be applied for unexpected goals. In the US, many red light cameras are operated by private companies that are contracted by local governments. They split the revenue. The private companies will then reduce the duration of yellow lights to to increase the number of tickets. The end result is sometimes more accidents as the time from green to red is reduced and more fine revenue is collected. That seems like a perverse incentive for a perverse outcome.

sofixa 5y ago
But that's an enormous implementation problem. You can't fault the good idea ( automates speed/basic rule like not going through red lights enforcement) for that. Fault the idiots who thought it's a good idea to outsource, with a profit motive at that, such an essential service. What's next, private cops paid per criminal caught so they have an incentive to create/force/incentivise/dupe criminals?
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  >You can't fault the good idea Is it really such a good idea if it took no time at all for it to start being abused in a manner that is opposite of the public interest? >What's next, private cops paid per criminal caught so they have an incentive to create/force/incentivise/dupe criminals? Informants do basically this all the time.
  - sofixa 5y ago
    > Is it really such a good idea if it took no time at all for it to start being abused in a manner that is opposite of the public interest? You can make that exact same argument for literally everything. Drunk drivers are against the public interest. So are child porn distributors, tax evaders, unfettered capitalists and a bunch of other things, so should we just ban cars, the internet and just about everything? You can ruin pretty much everything with the shittiest possible implementation, that doesn't invalidate the base logic behind the thing.
    - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
      >You can make that exact same argument for literally everything. Drunk drivers are against the public interest. So are child porn distributors, tax evaders, unfettered capitalists and a bunch of other things, so should we just ban cars, the internet and just about everything? Nobody cares when unjust enforcement practices are used against really bad criminals or are used against really small segments of the population. People going 70 on a road designed for 70 and signed at 55 is a broad cross section of the population. Slap draconian enforcement on top and people aren't just gonna bend over and take it.
- Eddy_Viscosity2 5y ago
  "You can't fault the good idea" Ha, reminds me of this exchange from Doctor Stangelove about how their implementation of thermonuclear war went a bit wrong: General "Buck" Turgidson : Ahem... The Duty Officer asked General Ripper to confirm the fact that he had issued the go code, and he said, uh, "Yes gentlemen, they are on their way in, and no one can bring them back. For the sake of our country, and our way of life, I suggest you get the rest of SAC in after them. Otherwise, we will be totally destroyed by Red retaliation. Uh, my boys will give you the best kind of start, 1400 megatons worth, and you sure as hell won't stop them now, uhuh. Uh, so let's get going, there's no other choice. God willing, we will prevail, in peace and freedom from fear, and in true health, through the purity and essence of our natural... fluids. God bless you all" and he hung up. [beat] General "Buck" Turgidson : Uh, we're, still trying to figure out the meaning of that last phrase, sir. President Merkin Muffley : There's nothing to figure out, General Turgidson. This man is obviously a psychotic. General "Buck" Turgidson : We-he-ell, uh, I'd like to hold off judgement on a thing like that, sir, until all the facts are in. President Merkin Muffley : General Turgidson! When you instituted the human reliability tests, you assured me there was no possibility of such a thing ever occurring! General "Buck" Turgidson : Well, I, uh, don't think it's quite fair to condemn a whole program because of a single slip-up, sir.

sofixa 5y ago

But that's an enormous implementation problem. You can't fault the good idea ( automates speed/basic rule like not going through red lights enforcement) for that. Fault the idiots who thought it's a good idea to outsource, with a profit motive at that, such an essential service. What's next, private cops paid per criminal caught so they have an incentive to create/force/incentivise/dupe criminals?

throwaway0a5e 5y ago
>You can't fault the good idea Is it really such a good idea if it took no time at all for it to start being abused in a manner that is opposite of the public interest? >What's next, private cops paid per criminal caught so they have an incentive to create/force/incentivise/dupe criminals? Informants do basically this all the time.
- sofixa 5y ago
  > Is it really such a good idea if it took no time at all for it to start being abused in a manner that is opposite of the public interest? You can make that exact same argument for literally everything. Drunk drivers are against the public interest. So are child porn distributors, tax evaders, unfettered capitalists and a bunch of other things, so should we just ban cars, the internet and just about everything? You can ruin pretty much everything with the shittiest possible implementation, that doesn't invalidate the base logic behind the thing.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    >You can make that exact same argument for literally everything. Drunk drivers are against the public interest. So are child porn distributors, tax evaders, unfettered capitalists and a bunch of other things, so should we just ban cars, the internet and just about everything? Nobody cares when unjust enforcement practices are used against really bad criminals or are used against really small segments of the population. People going 70 on a road designed for 70 and signed at 55 is a broad cross section of the population. Slap draconian enforcement on top and people aren't just gonna bend over and take it.
Eddy_Viscosity2 5y ago
"You can't fault the good idea" Ha, reminds me of this exchange from Doctor Stangelove about how their implementation of thermonuclear war went a bit wrong: General "Buck" Turgidson : Ahem... The Duty Officer asked General Ripper to confirm the fact that he had issued the go code, and he said, uh, "Yes gentlemen, they are on their way in, and no one can bring them back. For the sake of our country, and our way of life, I suggest you get the rest of SAC in after them. Otherwise, we will be totally destroyed by Red retaliation. Uh, my boys will give you the best kind of start, 1400 megatons worth, and you sure as hell won't stop them now, uhuh. Uh, so let's get going, there's no other choice. God willing, we will prevail, in peace and freedom from fear, and in true health, through the purity and essence of our natural... fluids. God bless you all" and he hung up. [beat] General "Buck" Turgidson : Uh, we're, still trying to figure out the meaning of that last phrase, sir. President Merkin Muffley : There's nothing to figure out, General Turgidson. This man is obviously a psychotic. General "Buck" Turgidson : We-he-ell, uh, I'd like to hold off judgement on a thing like that, sir, until all the facts are in. President Merkin Muffley : General Turgidson! When you instituted the human reliability tests, you assured me there was no possibility of such a thing ever occurring! General "Buck" Turgidson : Well, I, uh, don't think it's quite fair to condemn a whole program because of a single slip-up, sir.