3 ms·

this is a quick anecdote from California.. a very recent paper by Google on the "AI Opportunity Agenda" starts out with very optimistic claims about AI for admi

this is a quick anecdote from California.. a very recent paper by Google on the "AI Opportunity Agenda" starts out with very optimistic claims about AI for administering cities, the example is "timing stoplights to increase traffic efficiency and reduce carbon emissions" .. yet, what is actually implemented now in the SF Bay Area is .. automatic license plate readers at the bridges 24x7, and new Gov Newsom approved automatic speeding ticket generators on major roads in the largest cities. Traffic cameras at intersections have been implemented more and more in ten years. How can an intelligent citizen hear "optimized traffic lights" in the industry white paper, and see "automatic speeding tickets" in reality ? What number of cars on the road are adhering to the posted limit at all times? .. let's be blunt, it is a money machine, for local govt. Other examples of distributing public benefits, or handling public appeals, could easily see this level of duplicity. One thing is said in PR, another thing entirely is prevalent in practice with citizens. I claim this example is relevent to the Dutch concerns because a) Netherlands is similarly diverse, crowded and high-tech, and b) national level analysis has detected potential for abuse at the local govt level on a wide scale.

swatcoder 3y ago
It’s funny how language makes all the difference in telling stories like yours: A vendor published a marketing flyer suggesting ways their new expensive technology could improve services typical of a potential customer. The customer considered the marketing pitch in the flyer and found the ROI unconvincing in most cases, especially given that the technology remains largely unproven and would leave them at high risk of failure or cost surprises as an early adopter. Nonetheless, they did see at least one place where the implementation was more mature and might pay for itself (and perhaps even contributing revenue) while fulfilling an ongoing service mandate. — — Sounds like a dutiful government to me! Rather than being sucked into a flashy sales pitch by a vendor pitching an unproven and expensive product, they’ve stood firm and decided to mostly wait for others to absorb the early adopter risks, carefully stewarding public money. That governments can sometimes do very stupid and irresponsible things doesn’t mean that they’re doing so every time.
reidjs 3y ago
I hate receiving speeding tickets as much as the next guy, but I am pro automated speeding tickets. I must be getting old. - May encourage slower (safer) driving habits, fewer accidents - Automates some police duties, frees law enforcement to deal with actual crimes - City generates more money without raising taxes These are all hypothetical, and obviously corruption and apathy paves over most of it, but in practice, automated speeding tickets are a great use of "AI"
polski-g 3y ago
There seems to be a strange medium in which people think that speeding limits should exist but we shouldn't try too hard to enforce them. Like they just want a little bit of criminality, but not too much. If you are opposed to speeding limit enforcement, then just get rid of them. We do not need "sometimes laws".
- mistrial9 3y ago
  there is an expression in English that says: you put the cart before the horse. I think this applies here. It is not "we wish things to be this way, so they are this way" .. the real world is not like that. For several thousand years, new technology like carts or horse-stirrups, have changed a balance of power between groups of humans who use those, and groups that do not; in this example, the cart for the agrarian, the stirrup for the hunting pack. When new technology is implemented, the behavior of all humans at all times does not change instantly, nor does it change "because we want this".. It changes in fact, in practice, and over weeks or decades. Right now, there is some agreement among humans driving cars. They drive a certain style, on roads, with law enforcement and prices. Costs are applied for goods like tires or gas, and also penalties like speeding tickets due to a speed limit that is posted in a way that is considered fair and public... in most places. When I learned to drive, the legend of the "hidden speed limit sign" became dinner table talk. The ability of a small town to generate revenue for their police force, by waiting for people who are not fairly informed, or really just the police lying.. is common knowledge, because it is real. Your comment makes it appear as if whole populations "want criminality" and this appears to be a conveniently simple, blaming the driver, point of view. It sounds ok in two sentences, but does not hold up to deeper inspection of policy over time in real places. You might say "oh we are not in some small town" well guess what.. large cities have corruption, believe it. Whole countries have corruption, in fact. My post stands unedited.

swatcoder 3y ago

It’s funny how language makes all the difference in telling stories like yours: A vendor published a marketing flyer suggesting ways their new expensive technology could improve services typical of a potential customer. The customer considered the marketing pitch in the flyer and found the ROI unconvincing in most cases, especially given that the technology remains largely unproven and would leave them at high risk of failure or cost surprises as an early adopter. Nonetheless, they did see at least one place where the implementation was more mature and might pay for itself (and perhaps even contributing revenue) while fulfilling an ongoing service mandate. — — Sounds like a dutiful government to me! Rather than being sucked into a flashy sales pitch by a vendor pitching an unproven and expensive product, they’ve stood firm and decided to mostly wait for others to absorb the early adopter risks, carefully stewarding public money. That governments can sometimes do very stupid and irresponsible things doesn’t mean that they’re doing so every time.

reidjs 3y ago

I hate receiving speeding tickets as much as the next guy, but I am pro automated speeding tickets. I must be getting old. - May encourage slower (safer) driving habits, fewer accidents - Automates some police duties, frees law enforcement to deal with actual crimes - City generates more money without raising taxes These are all hypothetical, and obviously corruption and apathy paves over most of it, but in practice, automated speeding tickets are a great use of "AI"

polski-g 3y ago

There seems to be a strange medium in which people think that speeding limits should exist but we shouldn't try too hard to enforce them. Like they just want a little bit of criminality, but not too much. If you are opposed to speeding limit enforcement, then just get rid of them. We do not need "sometimes laws".

mistrial9 3y ago
there is an expression in English that says: you put the cart before the horse. I think this applies here. It is not "we wish things to be this way, so they are this way" .. the real world is not like that. For several thousand years, new technology like carts or horse-stirrups, have changed a balance of power between groups of humans who use those, and groups that do not; in this example, the cart for the agrarian, the stirrup for the hunting pack. When new technology is implemented, the behavior of all humans at all times does not change instantly, nor does it change "because we want this".. It changes in fact, in practice, and over weeks or decades. Right now, there is some agreement among humans driving cars. They drive a certain style, on roads, with law enforcement and prices. Costs are applied for goods like tires or gas, and also penalties like speeding tickets due to a speed limit that is posted in a way that is considered fair and public... in most places. When I learned to drive, the legend of the "hidden speed limit sign" became dinner table talk. The ability of a small town to generate revenue for their police force, by waiting for people who are not fairly informed, or really just the police lying.. is common knowledge, because it is real. Your comment makes it appear as if whole populations "want criminality" and this appears to be a conveniently simple, blaming the driver, point of view. It sounds ok in two sentences, but does not hold up to deeper inspection of policy over time in real places. You might say "oh we are not in some small town" well guess what.. large cities have corruption, believe it. Whole countries have corruption, in fact. My post stands unedited.