Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

caixinglobal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 416 posts

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#141

Post by joecool1029 »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #60
raleigh_user wrote: post #44

Heres further proof the justice system is screwed. Yesterday I was stopped while driving for not having current tags. Registration was renewed but I didn't have the sticker yet. Cop looked at my paperwork said all good be back in 5. Come to find out, I haven't had a valid license in 5 years. There was a mistake in court 5 years ago when I paid a fine (speeding ticket). I have a receipt from court saying all settled/m…

Hold the government employees liable (monetarily and criminally if they cause a loss of rights) for their mistakes and the problem will fix itself in quick order.

Except they are usually granted immunity by statute. It came up in conversation the other day with a group of friends, the question of 'citizens arrest'.

In my state, NJ, anyone can bring a disorderly person in front of a judge or detain someone who's suspected to have committed a major crime. However, it never happens because if we were incorrect then all sorts of civil and criminal claims could be made for injuries and/or false imprisonment.

We scoured the state's criminal law and found out members of law enforcement were relieved from liability if they were wrong about the above.

The other job that was exempt from liability was librarian. Apparently, a librarian can tackle someone suspected of stealing a book and it's ok under NJ law. [1]

[1] https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2013/title-2c/sectio...

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#142

Post by NeedMoreTea »

wgerard wrote: post #129
jrockway wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the case of jaywalking, the answer is simple. You just make it legal. Cars can slow down. For routes that need to be able to move at high speed, you build in grade separation. Jaywalking was just a "growth hack" that needs to be reverted. Society needed fast transportation, and it was developed at any cost. The cost is now too high, so we just roll it back. No torture required....

> In the case of jaywalking, the answer is simple. You just make it legal. Cars can slow down. Mmmm I dunno about that. Drivers have minimum reaction times and cars have stopping distances. Giving pedestrians the right-of-way in every situation seems like a recipe for a lot of collisions. It could work, but I think it would involve re-designing countless intersections to provide higher visibility of pedestrians for d…

UK has never had jaywalking laws. Most countries don't. We have crossings too, of course, which are optional, but sensible to use when it's rush hours etc. There's no sign that our collisions or injuries are disproportionately high.

A pedestrian crosses when they feel it is safe to do so, and anywhere along the road they choose. Having started to cross they have priority over traffic. Lately some drivers are less inclined to give way to pedestrians, but the law hasn't changed, and they are still legally obliged to do so. Motorways, of course, have no pedestrians.

The word was originally from jay-drivers. Which was a forgotten American term of abuse for carriage drivers who did not stick to the correct side of the road! Once cars arrived the industry lobbied and jaywalking became a term of abuse for pedestrians, and eventually a law.

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#143

Post by hueving »

icebraining wrote: post #64
tivert wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> have a mostly automated system detecting violations and such, and also a good human support system with power to override the decisions of the former; the two are not really incompatible. While that's true in the abstract, I don't think it's true in present society. Both private companies and government are under near-constant pressure to cut costs, and the people who are charged with implementing those cuts will b…

The exact same argument can be made to those criticizing the use of automation: it doesn't matter, because that pressure means it will be used anyway. And the whole discussion becomes meaningless.

No, when economic systems pressure companies into cutting corners, it's completely fair to criticize the situation.

"Think of all of the money people are saving by allowing businesses to refuse service to disabled people."

A system with massive net positive social utility does not alone justify injustice for a few.

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#145

Post by tom_ »

wgerard wrote: post #129
jrockway wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the case of jaywalking, the answer is simple. You just make it legal. Cars can slow down. For routes that need to be able to move at high speed, you build in grade separation. Jaywalking was just a "growth hack" that needs to be reverted. Society needed fast transportation, and it was developed at any cost. The cost is now too high, so we just roll it back. No torture required....

> In the case of jaywalking, the answer is simple. You just make it legal. Cars can slow down. Mmmm I dunno about that. Drivers have minimum reaction times and cars have stopping distances. Giving pedestrians the right-of-way in every situation seems like a recipe for a lot of collisions. It could work, but I think it would involve re-designing countless intersections to provide higher visibility of pedestrians for d…

Drivers have no problem avoiding other cars, which move much more quickly, are much less manoeuvreable, and have longer stopping distances. Strikes me that avoiding people on foot ought to be pretty simple.

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#146

Post by wgerard »

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #142
wgerard wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the case of jaywalking, the answer is simple. You just make it legal. Cars can slow down. Mmmm I dunno about that. Drivers have minimum reaction times and cars have stopping distances. Giving pedestrians the right-of-way in every situation seems like a recipe for a lot of collisions. It could work, but I think it would involve re-designing countless intersections to provide higher visibility of pedestrians for d…

UK has never had jaywalking laws. Most countries don't. We have crossings too, of course, which are optional, but sensible to use when it's rush hours etc. There's no sign that our collisions or injuries are disproportionately high. A pedestrian crosses when they feel it is safe to do so, and anywhere along the road they choose. Having started to cross they have priority over traffic. Lately some drivers are less inc…

> UK has never had jaywalking laws. Most countries don't... A pedestrian crosses when they feel it is safe to do so, and anywhere along the road they choose. Having started to cross they have priority over traffic.

That's really interesting! I wasn't aware of that.

What happens when a driver hits a pedestrian? Is there an investigation into whether the driver could've stopped in time?

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#147

Post by wgerard »

tom_ wrote: post #145
wgerard wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the case of jaywalking, the answer is simple. You just make it legal. Cars can slow down. Mmmm I dunno about that. Drivers have minimum reaction times and cars have stopping distances. Giving pedestrians the right-of-way in every situation seems like a recipe for a lot of collisions. It could work, but I think it would involve re-designing countless intersections to provide higher visibility of pedestrians for d…

Drivers have no problem avoiding other cars, which move much more quickly, are much less manoeuvreable, and have longer stopping distances. Strikes me that avoiding people on foot ought to be pretty simple.

Cars don't suddenly become visible unexpectedly unlike pedestrians, so that seems like a strange argument to me--with the notable exception perhaps of right-on-red, which isn't universal for sure (presumably for this very reason). Even then, the moving traffic has the right-of-way there.

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#148

Post by CogitoCogito »

013a wrote: post #117
maxxxxx wrote: post #4

Add to that a justice system also mostly automated and you are quickly caught in a Kafkaesque nightmare you can't get out if something goes wrong. Imagine the justice system run like google support. Even if something is clearly wrong you can't clear it up if you are not a famous person with a big Twitter following.

The purpose of computers is to enhance the ability of humans who have a job to accomplish, not do their job for them. If we don't figure this out as a society, we're doomed.

Also the operators of a computer system should always be held responsible for any errors of that system. Mistakes by the system are your* mistakes. Any decisions made by the system must be explained by you. All costs rectifying those mistakes must be bared by you.

*Obviously "you" means your organization, company, etc. and not necessarily some random office clerk.

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#149

Post by wgerard »

nickez wrote: post #138
wgerard wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the case of jaywalking, the answer is simple. You just make it legal. Cars can slow down. Mmmm I dunno about that. Drivers have minimum reaction times and cars have stopping distances. Giving pedestrians the right-of-way in every situation seems like a recipe for a lot of collisions. It could work, but I think it would involve re-designing countless intersections to provide higher visibility of pedestrians for d…

This is how it works in Sweden and I believe we have even fewer road casualties than the US.

Interesting! I didn't know that.

Also curious as with the other poster: What happens when a driver hits a pedestrian? Do they do an investigation into whether the driver could've stopped in time/was traveling the speed limit/etc?

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#150

Post by ken »

wgerard wrote: post #129
jrockway wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the case of jaywalking, the answer is simple. You just make it legal. Cars can slow down. For routes that need to be able to move at high speed, you build in grade separation. Jaywalking was just a "growth hack" that needs to be reverted. Society needed fast transportation, and it was developed at any cost. The cost is now too high, so we just roll it back. No torture required....

> In the case of jaywalking, the answer is simple. You just make it legal. Cars can slow down. Mmmm I dunno about that. Drivers have minimum reaction times and cars have stopping distances. Giving pedestrians the right-of-way in every situation seems like a recipe for a lot of collisions. It could work, but I think it would involve re-designing countless intersections to provide higher visibility of pedestrians for d…

The only issue I have with keeping it illegal is that so many people already do it. I don't commute by car but I drive a couple evenings a week through the city, and in every single intersection on my trip (5 miles) I see people jaywalking. I see people do it right in front of cops, and nobody cares.

What is the purpose of a law that few people follow, and which is never enforced? Shouldn't the laws of a republic reflect the will of the citizens?

Post reply on HN