5 ms·

I'll happily take that kind of Orwell on my streets. We have automatic speed-cameras and automatic toll systems already. Bus and truck drivers are required to

by moe 14y ago

I'll happily take that kind of Orwell on my streets. We have automatic speed-cameras and automatic toll systems already. Bus and truck drivers are required to have a blackbox onboard (mainly to control that drivers don't exceed their allowed driving-periods). I wouldn't mind a mandatory blackbox to record driving patterns. Feel free to go full Orwell and compute my insurance rate from my driving patterns, because that would most certainly fix quite a few reckless drivers. As long as the process is transparent (i.e. everyone knows about it and the algorithms are open source) I don't see a problem with that at all. Streets are a highly regulated environment anyway (for good reasons) and since we're approaching the era of driverless cars this is just logical progression.

mseebach 14y ago
Well, Orwell isn't to be read as a prescriptive list of things you can't do. The problem with automated law enforcement is quite simple: It operates in the gap between that which is dangerous enough that society decides to punish offenders, yet not dangerous enough that society needs to intervene to make the offender stop offending. That coupled with the perverse incentives of fines being a source of revenue, and you have a recipe for law enforcement gone wrong. Also, not explicitly linked to automated LE, but emphasised by it, is the graduation away from discretion in driving. Many drivers tend to forget that the fastest you can ever drive, anywhere, is as fast as is responsible. Even on German autobahns with no speed limit, you can get a steep ticket for going too fast - this is at the discretion of a police officer and ultimately the courts. Automated LE wipes out that discretion in favour of determinism. > As long as the process is transparent (i.e. everyone knows about it and the algorithms are open source) I don't see a problem with that at all. Well, you have near perfect empirical evidence to expect that won't be the case.

by moe 14y ago

mseebach 14y ago

Well, Orwell isn't to be read as a prescriptive list of things you can't do. The problem with automated law enforcement is quite simple: It operates in the gap between that which is dangerous enough that society decides to punish offenders, yet not dangerous enough that society needs to intervene to make the offender stop offending. That coupled with the perverse incentives of fines being a source of revenue, and you have a recipe for law enforcement gone wrong. Also, not explicitly linked to automated LE, but emphasised by it, is the graduation away from discretion in driving. Many drivers tend to forget that the fastest you can ever drive, anywhere, is as fast as is responsible. Even on German autobahns with no speed limit, you can get a steep ticket for going too fast - this is at the discretion of a police officer and ultimately the courts. Automated LE wipes out that discretion in favour of determinism. > As long as the process is transparent (i.e. everyone knows about it and the algorithms are open source) I don't see a problem with that at all. Well, you have near perfect empirical evidence to expect that won't be the case.