4 ms·
So liberty then. I don't disagree with you, but this modern flashpoint in the classic debate between individual liberty and collective safety does bring up the
by stevenjgarner 9mo ago
So liberty then. I don't disagree with you, but this modern flashpoint in the classic debate between individual liberty and collective safety does bring up the question what is saving 50,000+ lives annually actually worth in terms of loss of personal freedoms? I am personally struggling with this debate having lost loved ones in this manner.
- direwolf20 9mo agoRemote bricking of cars does not save 50,000 lives.
- stevenjgarner 9mo agoThat is not the argument being made. We are discussing how "dumb" vehicles (e.g. vehicles that contribute to 50,000+ fatalities annually) provide independence, privacy and freedom that "smart" vehicles (e.g. vehicles with self-driving that can be bricked at will) do not ensure.
- dotancohen 9mo agoThat actually is exactly the argument. GP posted about liberty concerns, he was met with claims of saving 50,000 lives.
- mixmastamyk 9mo agoAlso you are conflating thing the poster may not have intended. I’ve not heard anyone complain about collision avoidance systems, antilock brakes etc. But spying packages, and touchscreen dash, hell no.
- vel0city 9mo ago> I’ve not heard anyone complain about collision avoidance systems, antilock brakes etc I hear people on this site complain about these things all the time.
- mixmastamyk 9mo agoI’m sure it’s happened in the history of the world, but otherwise approaching zero.