Live data from Hacker News

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

caixinglobal.com

181–190 of 416 posts

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

#181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What happens when a driver hits a pedestrian? Is there an investigation into whether the driver could've stopped in time? The driver would be more guilty as they should have been going with a suitable speed and pay attention to the road when driving inside the city.

Living in a major city myself, I can think of several intersections where one could be traveling the speed limit and paying attention but be completely unable to stop in time for a pedestrian crossing unexpectedly. There are numerous streets and corners that are really poorly lit because of scaffolding/debris/etc.

>There are numerous streets and corners that are really poorly lit because of scaffolding/debris/etc.

Well, the city should light them properly and clean them up then?

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

#182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiosity could you explain what you mean? I'm not nearly old enough to remember prior to ATMs. But I love ATMs. I only have to go inside the bank to do things once every few years. Everything else is on the phone or ATM. And the people I deal with on the phone are almost always very helpful and knowledgeable. I know people have a lot of trouble with some of the big banks like Bank of America and Chase. But th…

I'm not nearly old enough to remember prior to ATMs. I am. When ATM's started to become a thing, we were told that with ATM's automating the basics, the bankers and tellers would have more time for more personalized service, Banks would lower fees through cost savings, and we'd all have higher interest rates on our savings because the banks would save so much money. None of those things happened. Things just got wors…

You are using banks wrong. That's not unexpected, most banks are designed to encourage you to use banks wrong and to in turn make this experience awful.

Last century, when I was a teenager, somebody set up a bank in the UK with an understanding of where all this is going. I have been with that bank ever since for my day-to-day banking needs.

The First Direct bank. They don't have any branches, they pay the same fees as other banks for there to be ATMs that work with their cards, and they own a web site and so on.

Instead of spending money on big solid-looking buildings people rarely visit, they run a massive 24/7 call centre, and all the call centre employees are trained to provide the entire service, since that's all they do. Absolutely every eventuality I've encountered was handled by telephoning them and then talking to a human. I often don't call them for six months at a time, but I've also had period when I called five times a day.

Two examples:

One day, still last century, I lost my wallet. Oh dear. I wanted to go out with friends, but I had no money, no cards. So I telephoned my bank. "Where are you?" they asked, because this was last century, so I was just a random voice with no indication of location. They looked up where I was, located some other bank building nearby and sent me there, then negotiated with that bank to give me cash.

This century, but a few years back, I bought somewhere to live. This involved a very large transaction. I phoned the bank, walked through exactly what I was doing and why, confirmed the transfer details and then they explained that no single employee of the bank is authorised to wave through such a transaction and I should expect to receive a phone call from another employee, who would confirm all the details again and then they could both authorise it. So I spoke to two people, for maybe a total of twenty minutes. Which considering the eye-watering sum of money that was about to just magically vanish from my account seems OK.

I don't understand why people would put up with any other sort of bank. I particularly don't understand people who are too busy to "go to the bank" on week days and then moan about it. This is 2018, I already didn't have to "go to the bank" in 1998. Get a better bank.

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

#183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Living in a major city myself, I can think of several intersections where one could be traveling the speed limit and paying attention but be completely unable to stop in time for a pedestrian crossing unexpectedly. There are numerous streets and corners that are really poorly lit because of scaffolding/debris/etc.

> There are numerous streets and corners that are really poorly lit because of scaffolding/debris/etc. Well, the city should light them properly and clean them up then?

From my original post:

> It could work, but I think it would involve re-designing countless intersections to provide higher visibility of pedestrians for drivers--not a bad goal, but I think a pretty unfeasible one.

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

#184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

To my knowledge, jaywalking is legal in Boston, where I live. The pedestrian is presumed to have the right-of-way.

I don't think that's true, it's just a very minimal fine (which I would be completely fine with):

https://www.mass.gov/how-to/respond-to-a-jaywalking-ticket

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

#185
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A machine can be tested for bias and measures taken against such bias are certainly followed. The same does not hold for humans. Detecting the bias (down to the person level) is very hard. Going on to remedy it is even harder. You can't (or at least shouldn't) reprogram people. In other words, you can change a racist machine, but not a racist cop.

you're not understanding that the racist cop/politician is the one controlling the machine, telling the programmer how to design its algorithms, and protecting the system from being audited

Racists or other biases at the top level can, to a limited degree, be dealt with through politics. You can, at the very least, make biased people want to not seem biased. However, bias at the lower levels is much harder to deal with. Especially if their superiors don't care beyond impressions.

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

#186

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…

>>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 Actually in many countries like the Netherlands and the UK, inside the city pedestrians have priority (right of way) over traffic everywhere. If a pedestrian crosses you stop, no jaywalking BS.

That's dangerously wrong. No, pedestrians do not have right of way over traffic everywhere inside cities in NL (though you could be forgiven to think it is that way by observing traffic).

Pedestrians do have right of way inside 'woonerven'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woonerf

Now, the fact that pedestrians do not have right of way does not mean cars are going to flatten people with impunity, of course every driver will do what they can to avoid an accident with a pedestrian. But if you step out in traffic on a busy Amsterdam street there most certainly will be an accident, even if everybody will do their best to avoid you, and you will be liable in that case, even if you're part of the mess.

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

#187
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I am lucky. I can pay that. It sucks but some people would be out food money if they suddenly had to pay $500 to drive again. Absolutely, court fees and fines disproportionately punish those with low incomes. Increasing enforcement of low level violations by surveillance tech and/or AI is going to crush a lot of people if we don't change that fact. https://www.npr.org/2014/05/19/312158516/increasing-court-fe... http…

Finland, I believe, scales fines proportionally to your income. Not perfect (the rich can more easily hide their income than the not so rich), but a good start.

Yes - a well-known example was Anssi Vanjoki (former Nokia director) getting a fine of 116,000 euros for driving 75 km/h in a 50 zone. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1759791.stm

I have heard of other countries that have similar systems.

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

#188

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 Actually in many countries like the Netherlands and the UK, inside the city pedestrians have priority (right of way) over traffic everywhere. If a pedestrian crosses you stop, no jaywalking BS.

Wait, is it just inside the major cities? Not everywhere?

All cities, major AND minor (and villages).

You wouldn't except this to happen to the equivalent of the New Jersey Turnpike, of course. So, on high speed highways, on the other hand, you're often not allowed to randomly cross, except in specific areas.

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

#189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If employees were personally liable for costs of mistakes, no one would do the work - too much personal risk involved. Also, the degree of blaming anyone-but-me would be off the charts, crippling the organization. Having some type of accountability is important - incompetent people should not be allowed to keep their job, and institutions should have some incentive to improve, but not sure putting all the burden on i…

There are many jobs for which the doer is personally liable. They are required to be bonded and insured so that if anything happens, they don't go bankrupt or otherwise avoid compensating for damages. And there are still people to do the work.

Not sure that's the best solution here, but the assumption that "no one would do the work" is likely not correct.

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

#190
post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ref…

I definitely see your point, and I have mixed feelings on it to be fair (for the very reason you noted). I think it's more about establishing right-of-way for me, more than punishing pedestrians for jaywalking. I don't think it's smart to allow pedestrians the right-of-way at all times, but I'm also learning that other countries do this already so I'm certainly willing to admit I could be wrong here!

In Germany I think it's different. If you cross when you aren't allowed the car has the right of way. I have actually no idea why this isn't the case in Canada. Seems pretty reasonable; light shows 'walk' symbol and you cross knowing you are in the right of way, but the hand stops flashing and if a car hits you then your dead and wrong. Seems a really reliable system that will safely predict outcomes consistent with obliging behavior.

To be honest, I walk quite often and yet I'm absolutely against pedestrian rights as they are today and I believe it's totally impractical and against any common sense having the laws in favour of pedestrians as they are now, nor do I believe it makes roads safer for anyone. In fact if you apply human psychology/behavior inclusive of a person's ability to focus on multiple obstructions, notifications, etc, I'd be willing to bet that drivers are by far overwhelmed in modern cities and that it's reckless disregard for public safety that pedestrians are given absolutely no accountability for their actions beyond dead right or right.

Post reply on HN