AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking • Hacker News Board

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

#281

Post by Dylan16807 » Sun, Nov 25, 2018, 11:39 PM UTC

asmosoinio wrote: post #187

askvictor wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Huge fines for the rich are amusing but scaling that part of the cost doesn't address the core problem very well.

Actually, a fee of 14 days of income sounds crippling to someone who's poor, so that's an example of it not helping at all.

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

#282

Post by SquishyPanda23 » Sun, Nov 25, 2018, 11:39 PM UTC

arghwhat wrote: post #243

SquishyPanda23 wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> punishing productivity and rewarding laziness. I'm unaware of any scientific evidence that wealth is the result of hard work and that poverty is the result of laziness. Can you cite empirical evidence for this claim?

Many seem to interpret what I said as "poverty equals laziness". This was never in any way what I said. However, almost regardless of your situation, harder works gives greater results. You'll get significantly more if you work 14 hours a day instead of 8. Whether you're working a shit job and just trying to push up your work hours, you're trying to build your own company, or even if you're managing your multi-billio…

Okay, well I apologize if I misinterpreted what you're saying.

When you say > Designing laws around statistical outliers seem idiotic. The Dubai prince case is certainly not the norm.

I take you to be implying that outside of outliers, wealth is largely a matter of hard work, and poverty is largely a matter of laziness.

But that's the claim that I'm not aware of any evidence for. The Earth is full of extremely poor people who work nearly every waking hour.

There is no doubt some portion of the variance in wealth that's explained by hours worked after you control for other variables, but if your claim is that hours worked is a strong predictor of wealth, then that requires empirical support. It seems unlikely to me, but I'm not ruling it out.

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

#283

Post by Retric » Sun, Nov 25, 2018, 11:45 PM UTC

arghwhat wrote: post #274

Retric wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Income does not imply wealth, but wealth does imply income. Eventually, wealth results in income even for lazy bums. So, you can’t defend income by saying they must work hard as many of the largest incomes have nothing to do with hard work.

Wealth does not imply income. You could be a retired with a massive fortune and no income. You could be born into wealth, not actually earning any yourself. They are different concepts. One can lead to another, by neither implies the other.

> Retired with a massive fortune.

Things of extreme value create income streams property > rent, companies > dividends, apreceation, and buybacks. Bonds > interest etc.

Even cold hard cash in a savings account generates significant income when you start talking about 100,000,000+$ just sitting there.

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

#284

Post by allannienhuis » Sun, Nov 25, 2018, 11:45 PM UTC

reidjs wrote: post #170

allannienhuis wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sorry, I have no idea what you're trying to say.

In effect the state received an extra $250 by making this mistake, so there is little incentive for them to fix it.

fair enough. But that's a pretty adversarial way to think about the state (as an opponent of the citizen). I'd prefer to think that in most democracies, laws are usually designed or at least intended to protect citizens from abuses like that. That said, I think the U.S. has a less-than-stellar reputation for citizen-friendly laws. :(

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

#285

Post by EpicEng » Sun, Nov 25, 2018, 11:48 PM UTC

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…

I don't think a minor clerical error demonstrates that "the justice system is screwed." Mistakes will happen and they operate at pretty high volume.

I was on the receiving end of one of these years ago. Pulled over and arrested for missing payments on a few tickets. The tickets were paid prior and they eventually realized their mistake, but I still had to pay the jail processing fee.

It sucks, and things could certainly be better, but saying that the entire justice system is "screwed" is a pretty harsh indictment.

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

#286

Post by eponeponepon » Sun, Nov 25, 2018, 11:52 PM UTC

wgerard wrote: post #169

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Loosely the presumption of guilt lands on the car driver for failing to stop in time, just as it would if you ran into the back of someone, or hit a cyclist. There are of course circumstances where a driver has little chance, like a kid running from between parked cars after their ball, someone not looking, or a cyclist running a light. The police generally investigate the scene and assess what happened, measure out…

Super interesting. I have to admit my bias is to say that it seems difficult to assess when the pedestrian became visible to the driver (which would affect whether they could've stopped in time), but I'm also totally willing to admit that I might be nitpicking and it's a fine system. Thanks for the response!

The point here, though, is that it doesn't matter whether the driver could've seen them, because culpability rests with the driver by default (except, as mentioned, in situations such as motorways, where pedestrians aren't allowed).

In very general terms, as a pedestrian in the UK, you have no particular right to step into the road other than at marked crossings, but as soon as you do, you have total right of way, no matter how stupid it was of you to step into the road.

There are various crimes in the vein of 'obstructing a public highway' and so forth, so you aren't completely free to be an asshole, but even if you are, it's still on drivers to avoid hitting you; in my experience, this tends to make drivers more careful and aware of nearby pedestrians, so I'm fully in favour of the status quo.

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

#287

Post by Dylan16807 » Sun, Nov 25, 2018, 11:58 PM UTC

Udik wrote: post #280

arghwhat wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By that standard you could also propose that the poor should be fined even heavier because they are the lazy ones and should get punished for that. I hope that you also understand how that is absurd on its own, and that I certainly wasn't suggesting this. However, yes, if we're seeing the entire system (including fining speeding) as a way to adjusting bad behavior, then yes, you could theoretically think of a syste…

> I stated... somewhere, that the magnitude of your crime does not scale with your income, so scaling the fine that way does not seem logical. My favourite way of arguing in favour of fines proportional to wealth/ income is this: wealth is something that gives you the power to buy things: say better food, better houses, better cars, or even things that most people cannot afford, for example a big yacht. Depending on…

It depends on what the law is for. For example you could have a nice solid fine for littering, with half of it earmarked for public cleaning/improvement. If someone violates that and reliably pays the cost, it's win-win. They get to be lazy and the environment is improved.

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

#288

Post by EpicEng » Sun, Nov 25, 2018, 11:59 PM UTC

paulie_a wrote: post #90

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…

Can you file a punitive lawsuit against every single person involved? I mean every single person. Scorched Earth approach. Maybe they will be slightly more attentive to their duties in the future.

No you cannot, but I wonder how you'd feel if you were slapped with a lawsuit every time you wrote a bug.

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

#289

Post by burfog » Sun, Nov 25, 2018, 11:59 PM UTC

CalRobert wrote: post #218

misterhtmlcss wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

It's because the streets were originally for pedestrians. Cars invaded the space previously used by people walking. Why does wearing a big box give you the right to own the road? By that logic I should be able to ride my bike on the footpath and blame any pedestrians I hit.

This is not historically correct. Streets exist for carts and chariots and carriages. These are drawn by horses, oxen, mules, donkeys, and stranger things.

Those were probably killing jaywalkers in ancient Rome.

Pedestrians only need paths, which may have staircases and stepping stones.

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

#290

Post by cc439 » Sun, Nov 25, 2018, 11:59 PM UTC

askvictor wrote: post #168

goatsi wrote: 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.

That just screws the middle class (~$40k to $150k). The cost of waging legal warfare against the ticket will still be greater than the inflated fine while the wealthy will easily be able to afford the kind of lawyer who can get an overworked traffic court judge and the cop who has to take a day off from fieldwork to agree to more reasonable terms.

The solution to fines is to simply get rid of fines and instead use a more aggressive "point" system. I'm not wealthy by any means but the threat of a $200 ticket has zero impact on my driving habits whereas the threat of having my license suspended if I get 2 tickets in a 12 month span (a hypothetical example of possible punishment btw) would definitely change how I drive.

I can't really think of any crime that carries a fine rather than revocation of certain rights where this wouldn't work. The only issue is that of enforcement, you have to make the threat of getting caught a second or third time real enough that the punishment becomes psychologically meaningful.