try_the_bass

7 ms·

61.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
> I think starting from "put surveillance cameras everywhere, because IF they contribute to a number of arrests that MIGHT end up being a net good" is an uncompelling argument. I'm not starting from this argument, though.
62.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
> This is setting up Cardinal Richlieu's ideal tyranny: "If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged." It's a good thing, then, that mos
63.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
> Socially, constant monitoring creates a chilling effect on free behavior in public spaces, undermining individual liberty. I was skeptical from the first sentence, but I stopped here. This "chilling effect" is a favorite of p
64.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
> That's why countries have constitutions, that usually can not be completely replaced. Except, of course, by the action of a (super)majority, at least in the US.
65.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
> But, in general, just because the majority wants to do something doesn't mean it's legitimate to force everyone to accept it. I mean, isn't that the literal definition of democracy? I tend to agree that "tyranny of
66.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
> The idea that me an individual observing you, and a large, well funded company allied with the US government observing you has no difference, quite frankly, leads me to conclude* you are arguing in bad faith. I mean, in both cases, I&#
67.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
Could you make your point plainly?
68.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
I know this is supposed to be some kind of "gotcha", but I'm legitimately curious: what essential liberty is someone giving up being surveilled in public?
69.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
> Okay: Just how long would you permit someone to follow you around with a camera, recording everything you do? Probably not long. I might also make it clear I'm not a fan, but at the end of the day, they're generally within th
70.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
I don't understand this argument. How is Flock "collaborating" by selling their product? Sure they're happy their product is selling. How does that imply collaboration? I mean, you're welcome to buy an Apple Vision
71.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
If you're only reading the stories of the false positives or the abuses of power, you're making your judgements on only a fraction of the available information. I think the suffering/abuse is able to be reasonably controlled
72.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
What if I run my own cameras, my own local models, and my own analysis? All from the privacy of my own home... Is that okay? What if I recruit a few friends around my town to do the same, and we share data and findings? Is that also fine?
73.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
I'd be curious if one could file a restraining order against Flock, and if that would actually be enforceable? I mean, it might be a viable way to push back against them.
74.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
But Flock doesn't "follow you around"? It's fixed location cameras. If you avoid the locations, you avoid the cameras, and thus the tracking. > There is no difference to me that some company does it via technology. I
75.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
Companies have plenty of rights in the US.
76.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
Okay, can you articulate the difference? I don't disagree that quantity has a quality of it's own in some circumstances , but that's not an inherent property of "quantity".
77.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
I agree, this is stalking. But again, this is not what Flock is doing. By this same logic, traffic cameras and CCTV surveillance are "stalking", which doesn't seem accurate?
78.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
I mean, he's not. Police departments and other organizations who buy and install Flock cameras are the ones doing the "forcing". Again, I'm pretty anti-Flock, but place the blame where it's due and use good logic to
79.
by try_the_bass 8mo ago
> False, he is forcing Flock on EVERYONE > No one has permitted themselves to be surveilled As much as I dislike Flock, this is bad logic. There's no such thing as opting out of surveillance in public spaces. Public spaces are de
80.
by try_the_bass 9mo ago
... What? This isn't an answer, this is just incoherent, circular rambling.
81.
by try_the_bass 9mo ago
But what is the difference, in this case?
82.
by try_the_bass 9mo ago
This... Is a nothingburger? This is what you were referring to?
83.
by try_the_bass 9mo ago
> I don't know. So why are you making claims predicated on having knowledge of the situation?
84.
by try_the_bass 9mo ago
> You have it or you don't. To quote the Gorillaz: > That's a fallacy Self-control is not a "have it or don't" thing. It can be developed and exercised, often simply by trying and failing, and then trying agai
85.
by try_the_bass 10mo ago
They didn't, and you're again repeating misinformation as fact. What happened was that they refused to turn access on for the Crimean region, which is not the same as "cutting off Ukrainian access". I understand nuance i
86.
by try_the_bass 10mo ago
Notably absent from TFA... Probably because it's not actually a truthful characterization of what happened! I know it's popular to find every possible reason to bag on Musk, but you don't need to resort to disinformation to d
87.
by try_the_bass 10mo ago
And plenty of immigrants have lived successful, productive lives in such environments. You're just arguing vague hypotheticals at this point, and two can easily play that game and get no where. I'm not sure what your point is anym
88.
by try_the_bass 10mo ago
> what makes you think the world would actually want you in their country? Because I would bring value to their country by being a productive, taxpaying citizen?
89.
by try_the_bass 10mo ago
> Just as in large cities, people moderate their behaviour. Given that crime rates are generally higher the more densely populated an area is (in the US, at least), I'm not sure this is true
90.
by try_the_bass 10mo ago
Build a better, cheaper replacement, then?

More ›