6 ms·

you described a life under techno-fascism

by slt2021 2y ago

clown_strike 2y ago
You see techno-fascism, others here see a business opportunity.
kypro 2y ago
Not really. It's like this in many cities in the UK.
woah 2y ago
Every subway gate should be a ticket checker
- dullcrisp 2y ago
  Fascist!
mitthrowaway2 2y ago
Is that the term for a uniform, unbiased, automated enforcement of law? Do we prefer that speeding should only be punished when the wrong kind of people do it? Perhaps encourage everyone to make a habit of breaking the law, so that we can use it against them when they say something we don't like?
- slt2021 2y ago
  >uniform, unbiased, automated enforcement of law? the only uniform thing would be data collection, loss of privacy, and being a victim of gov-t oppression. "unbiased" - depends on the bias inherent to the training dataset and enforcement algorithm. Areas with more sensors will get more enforcement. what if you a victim of false positive? you wont be able to appeal to "unbiased automated enforcement" just look at recent events, when Trump just stripped some students of their greencards and deported them with 0 due process. or took a guy with some random tatoo and sent one way to El Salvador...
  - mitthrowaway2 2y ago
    How is getting ticketed for speeding "being a victim of government oppression"? By "bias inherent to the training dataset and enforcement algorithm", are you talking about anything other than "areas with more sensors"? These aren't exactly LLMs; it's kind of like saying vending machines might be biased because there are more of them in certain areas. The areas where there are more of them will indeed be the areas where speeding rules get more strongly enforced (eg. school zones), so if you don't want cars speeding through your neighbourhood, you'd want to have better coverage. The areas with no enforcement would be the neighbourhoods being discriminated against, so is your view that it's better to have speed cameras nowhere? As for due process, that seems entirely unrelated but if anything this puts you in a better spot. If you are a victim of false positive, the recording is right there, you download it from the web portal, review whether it was really a false positive or not, and if so, take it to court to dispute the charge. You don't have to he-said-she-said with a police officer who might, if they were feeling especially vindictive, plant some evidence on you during the traffic stop.
    - slt2021 2y ago
      tickets is only a pretext, surveillance and loss of privacy will affect anyone regardless of whether they drive the speed limit or exceed it. this is what fundamentally people don't understand. They look at one government failure (inability to enforce order on roadways), and cheer to spend taxpayer money to erect a techno-fascist surveillance state. Sure, if you speed you will get ticket, but also if you post anything against the US government or against Israel, you will be tracked and thugs will come knocking your door. It is fundamentally wrong to allow government to massively track and collect data on citizens, as it makes it trivial to track and harass people since all your data is in one place, one SQL query away and the state will use it against you
stevenAthompson 2y ago
Enforcing the laws that already exist via technological means instead of with personal prejudice, guns, and high speed pursuits is not fascism. Could it eventually lead to fascism? Maybe, but so could enforcing the law with fast cars and guns if we aren't careful.
- slt2021 2y ago
  the government will always have a way have non-uniform enforcement. Elites and important people won't be enforced, while everyone else will get mass surveillance, loss of privacy, and techno-totalitarianism. Everything will be according to the laws, but you forgot who is writing and passing the laws and in whose interest. It is rarely the interest of the common folk.
  - stevenAthompson 2y ago
    If I'm following your reasoning the argument seems to be: We should continue to do a bad job of enforcement for everyone because the laws are currently poorly enforced for some. I hope I'm just misreading you.
    - slt2021 2y ago
      nobody creates techno-fascist regime and invests hundreds of millions into surveillance infrastructure with the goal of enforcing speed tickets. It is just how it is being sold to public, because people are exposed to speeding drivers and would likely to approve of this measure. the problem does not match to the solution. if you look at China then you will see how the state can turn surveillance into oppression machine. if I can give you analogy, it is: when Scrum team struggles with delivery of software (delayed releases or buggy features), the Scrum master proposes to install CCTV cameras monitoring developers and screen capture software that will monitor every single your action with the goal of "improving performance of the team". sure the goal is noble, but you are just signing up to be under constant surveillance and be subject to whatever random punishments "The Algorithm" decides to throw at you
seryoiupfurds 2y ago
People are free to choose not to run red lights.

you described a life under techno-fascism

clown_strike 2y ago

You see techno-fascism, others here see a business opportunity.

kypro 2y ago

Not really. It's like this in many cities in the UK.

woah 2y ago

Every subway gate should be a ticket checker

dullcrisp 2y ago
Fascist!

mitthrowaway2 2y ago

Is that the term for a uniform, unbiased, automated enforcement of law? Do we prefer that speeding should only be punished when the wrong kind of people do it? Perhaps encourage everyone to make a habit of breaking the law, so that we can use it against them when they say something we don't like?

slt2021 2y ago
>uniform, unbiased, automated enforcement of law? the only uniform thing would be data collection, loss of privacy, and being a victim of gov-t oppression. "unbiased" - depends on the bias inherent to the training dataset and enforcement algorithm. Areas with more sensors will get more enforcement. what if you a victim of false positive? you wont be able to appeal to "unbiased automated enforcement" just look at recent events, when Trump just stripped some students of their greencards and deported them with 0 due process. or took a guy with some random tatoo and sent one way to El Salvador...
- mitthrowaway2 2y ago
  How is getting ticketed for speeding "being a victim of government oppression"? By "bias inherent to the training dataset and enforcement algorithm", are you talking about anything other than "areas with more sensors"? These aren't exactly LLMs; it's kind of like saying vending machines might be biased because there are more of them in certain areas. The areas where there are more of them will indeed be the areas where speeding rules get more strongly enforced (eg. school zones), so if you don't want cars speeding through your neighbourhood, you'd want to have better coverage. The areas with no enforcement would be the neighbourhoods being discriminated against, so is your view that it's better to have speed cameras nowhere? As for due process, that seems entirely unrelated but if anything this puts you in a better spot. If you are a victim of false positive, the recording is right there, you download it from the web portal, review whether it was really a false positive or not, and if so, take it to court to dispute the charge. You don't have to he-said-she-said with a police officer who might, if they were feeling especially vindictive, plant some evidence on you during the traffic stop.
  - slt2021 2y ago
    tickets is only a pretext, surveillance and loss of privacy will affect anyone regardless of whether they drive the speed limit or exceed it. this is what fundamentally people don't understand. They look at one government failure (inability to enforce order on roadways), and cheer to spend taxpayer money to erect a techno-fascist surveillance state. Sure, if you speed you will get ticket, but also if you post anything against the US government or against Israel, you will be tracked and thugs will come knocking your door. It is fundamentally wrong to allow government to massively track and collect data on citizens, as it makes it trivial to track and harass people since all your data is in one place, one SQL query away and the state will use it against you

stevenAthompson 2y ago

Enforcing the laws that already exist via technological means instead of with personal prejudice, guns, and high speed pursuits is not fascism. Could it eventually lead to fascism? Maybe, but so could enforcing the law with fast cars and guns if we aren't careful.

slt2021 2y ago
the government will always have a way have non-uniform enforcement. Elites and important people won't be enforced, while everyone else will get mass surveillance, loss of privacy, and techno-totalitarianism. Everything will be according to the laws, but you forgot who is writing and passing the laws and in whose interest. It is rarely the interest of the common folk.
- stevenAthompson 2y ago
  If I'm following your reasoning the argument seems to be: We should continue to do a bad job of enforcement for everyone because the laws are currently poorly enforced for some. I hope I'm just misreading you.
  - slt2021 2y ago
    nobody creates techno-fascist regime and invests hundreds of millions into surveillance infrastructure with the goal of enforcing speed tickets. It is just how it is being sold to public, because people are exposed to speeding drivers and would likely to approve of this measure. the problem does not match to the solution. if you look at China then you will see how the state can turn surveillance into oppression machine. if I can give you analogy, it is: when Scrum team struggles with delivery of software (delayed releases or buggy features), the Scrum master proposes to install CCTV cameras monitoring developers and screen capture software that will monitor every single your action with the goal of "improving performance of the team". sure the goal is noble, but you are just signing up to be under constant surveillance and be subject to whatever random punishments "The Algorithm" decides to throw at you

seryoiupfurds 2y ago

People are free to choose not to run red lights.