4 ms·
no thanks. pervasive surveillance is bad enough already without the requirement that the surveiled pay for the hardware themselves.
by leetcrew 3y ago
no thanks. pervasive surveillance is bad enough already without the requirement that the surveiled pay for the hardware themselves.
- judge2020 3y agoWhy is surveillance a requirement? Local recordings would have virtually no downsides unless the intention is to evade responsibility for traffic collisions.
- leetcrew 3y agoI do actually have a dashcam built into my personal vehicle. I have mixed feelings about it, but overall I think the benefits outweigh the risks. that said, the risks are not to be taken lightly. even if the recording is only stored locally, it can be seized by authorities or subpoenaed later. you can't guarantee it will only be used to settle minor traffic disputes. like I said, I'm (mostly) happy to make that decision for myself. but having the government require people to collect evidence against themselves is a hard no from me.
- factormeta 3y ago>but having the government require people to collect evidence against themselves is a hard no from me. Not an expert on US constitution, but Isn't that a violation?
- judge2020 3y agoDriving on public roads is a privilege, not a right, which is why it's legal for them to institutes requirements like "must have insurance" or "must have a driver's license".