6 ms·
I hope this tech catches on, we have a ton people who like to tear around my neighborhood at 4AM in cars with exhaust mods. A few times it’s been loud enough t
by showerst 4y ago
I hope this tech catches on, we have a ton people who like to tear around my neighborhood at 4AM in cars with exhaust mods.
A few times it’s been loud enough to wake up my infant, at which point I’d probably vote to upgrade it a capital crime…
- bsedlm 4y agoI hope you're joking. because otherwise, neo-surveillance fascism here we come.
- lettergram 4y agoI’m pretty sure there is no stopping it at this point. People give up the rights not just for security but for a minor increase in comfort at this point.
- XorNot 4y agoWhat right is being given up? They're already committing a crime in a public area, this is just enforcing it. What about the citizens of a neighbourhoods right to quiet enjoyment of their property?
- neoromantique 4y ago>What right is being given up? Any reasonable expectation of privacy. Not all cars are committing a crime when driving past, but every car driving-by will be logged. At least that is already a status quo in most of Europe, unfortunately.
- mikeyouse 4y agoALPR is a completely different technology that exists completely separately than traffic enforcement cameras. It’s completely possible to ban widespread ALPR usage and maintain automatic enforcement with speed / noise cameras.
- toomuchtodo 4y agoThere is no expectation of privacy in public in the US.
- neoromantique 4y agoI mean, yeah, but having your movement constantly tracked by government is still unsettling. I feel the right way to handle that(and traffic infractions in general) is through culture, not surveillance.
- toomuchtodo 4y ago> I feel the right way to handle that(and traffic infractions in general) is through culture, not surveillance. We’re well past a polite society as a solution. Regulation and governance around collected data, with accountability for transgressions, is the path to success.
- neoromantique 4y agoSo, like Chinese social credit system? Thanks, but no thanks, I'd like to avoid living in a literal dystopia for as long as I possibly can.
- throwaway0a5e 4y ago
- robonerd 4y ago> We’re well past a polite society as a solution. Isn't that a bit fatalist? Perhaps our society has degenerated, but who's to say things can't get better? Things have gotten better before. Society used to be very rude and brutish, but then got better. It could get better again, without having to build a techno-surveillance authoritarian monster with capabilities the Stasi could only dream of...
- toomuchtodo 4y ago> Isn't that a bit fatalist? I call it like I see it. Hope for the best, plan for the worst. Hoping people will be better does not make it so, in my experience. Some encouragement is occasionally required.
- fnordpiglet 4y agoThere’s literally no expectation, promise, or protection of privacy in public. That’s why I’m more than entitled to hang a camera on my front door and record everyone walking down the street, or for that matter take a photograph in public that might capture other people. There are literally no rights infringed, and if police were stationed and handing out tickets manually it would be entirely equivalent. The only difference is the automated solution never tires and doesn’t give tickets to people of color only.
- faeriechangling 4y agoThere has never been any expectation of privacy on a public motorway in my lifetime. Cops could always literally pull you over and peer into your vehicle with a flashlight on the vague grounds of being suspicious. Nowadays there's the rising popularity of things like dash cams. Public roads are an area where safety absolutely pummelled privacy in the war between the two values.
- wanderingstan 4y agoThese are “rights” I and many will be glad to give up, just as I’m glad to surrender my “right” to park in public parks, my “right” to pee in a public pool, and so forth. The airspace/sound space is a common good and should be protected.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- recursive 4y agoIt will be worth it. I would also accept banning internal combustion engines instead.
- showerst 4y agoI’m absolutely joking about the death penalty. I’m not at all joking about the auto ticket. If we won’t enforce it why make it illegal? And with a nuisance violation, what’s the difference between sticking a cop there and a camera? I’m not in favor of camera tickets for anything serious or judgement based, but sounds like a nice minor deterrent for nuisance.
- foolfoolz 4y agobecause it’s the same path to speed cameras and a bunch of other stuff watching you all the time. why not just give out “average speed” tickets like the uk does? it’s illegal to go over the speed limit. if we won’t enforce it, why make it illegal?
- yongjik 4y agoHonestly "average speed" tickets are a great idea, and I'm not sure why you speak as if it's bad. These "bunches of stuff" aren't watching you "all the time," they're watching you when you are on a public road, paid for by other taxpayers. If anyone's upset that the government is enforcing traffic rules, they're free to build or rent a private circuit and drive there in whatever way they please. Capitalism for the win.
- teakettle42 4y agoThe only thing that makes the vast landscape of laws palatable is that they are not all enforced, all the time, without fail. I seriously doubt you’d be able to get through a single day without breaking the law. While I’d prefer to have fewer laws on the books, I’ll settle for having limited enforcement. Not everything that’s illegal is immoral, unsafe, or harmful to others. The context and specifics of a situation often matters. Your dystopian authoritarian ideals admit no room for autonomy — individual or otherwise — to apply situational context.
- hiptobecubic 4y agoYou're conflating "all laws" with "one specific, concrete, obviously meaningful law with tons of research behind it and for which violations can be almost perfectly reliably classified."
- dsizzle 4y agoSo speed cameras are fascist?
- freedomben 4y agoThey make lots of mistakes that hurt innocent people, and you have to go to court and prove your innocence. Also they don't consider any situational context. Sounds pretty fascist to me. At least in most jurisdictions they're required to send you the photo now, so when it's clearly not you driving it's a lot easier to get them thrown out by the judge. Still pretty shitty to have to take time off to go to court for something you didn't do.
- fnordpiglet 4y agoI’m not sure you’re using fascism appropriately here. I think you’re meaning “bad and I disagree with it,” but fascism does have an actual political meaning. Sorry to nitpick, but over using fascism as a word dilutes the actual meaning which is limited, an actual movement, and very scary stuff.
- aaaaaaaaata 4y ago> fascism does have an actual political meaning Is it anything like "tracks my plate and toll RFID chip all around town without any suspicion of crime"?
- astura 4y ago>Sounds pretty fascist to me. Dude, "fascist" does not mean "something I think is bad."
- Symbiote 4y ago> when it's clearly not you driving In this case, don't you just tell the police who is driving? "This is my wife/son/carsharing-app-renter" That is the case in the UK, anyway. You must either confirm you were driving, or say who else was driving. (Example: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6298333/speeding-ticket https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6298333/spee... )
- oh_sigh 4y agoWhat kind of problems are you predicting? Have they appeared in England, which is a fairly similar country to the US, but is much more open to using mass CCTV infrastructure?
- micromacrofoot 4y agoI can’t have an open trash fire in my yard either, we need rules about pollution when we live together
- BurningFrog 4y agoWe're already on camera all the time in public. There will only be more cameras in the future. Given that, I see no reason to not use the cameras for something good.
- version_five 4y agoA police or bylaw officer could also do their job and enforce the rules. It doesn't need some kind of automated enforcement to solve it, and doesn't come with the same dystopian automated surveillance and ticketing.
- toomuchtodo 4y agoThe automated solution is objective (versus the well known subjective application of law enforcement) and efficient (no breaks, no sleep, no pensions). No law breaking, no ticket.
- version_five 4y agoOur law enforcement system was not designed to be automated. It works (because of how it has evolved, not by explicit design) on the threat of enforcement. So people "breaking the law" - and I'm thinking here of traffic laws and other minor offenses - are basically free to weigh their own risk tolerance for the penalty against the chances of being caught. This has flaws, but it preserves some notion of freedom while generally pushing people in the "right" direction to control behaviors society doesn't want. Laws and penalties are commensurate with that, ie there are countless traffic laws all drivers break every day, because they are there to guide and penalties are rare. That is much different than mandatory automated enforcement that would or could penalize everyone every time they broke a law. If we went there, all laws would have to be revisited to understand what is an appropriate threshold and penalty so that we could preserve some kind of personal autonomy. But what would happen in practice is that everyone would get the fines. Then there is the whole question of discretion and personalization. For most people here, I'm sure this falls on deaf ears, but I hope you see my point. I don't believe in technocracy and a world where our behavior is enforced that way is horrifying. Anyone who likes that idea could move to China or Singapore to try it out
- porknubbins 4y agoI agree with your point in general it would be borderline tyrannical to track and punish every harmless violation of traffic laws, but in the case of vehicle modifications its not a momentary behavior, its a choice to permanently install something. I love motorsports and high power bikes and cars but would love to see these annoying loud exhausts off the public streets.
- renewiltord 4y agoI think it would be neat if we place these at each street corner and fine every dog owner whose dog barks louder than the sound limit at the time.