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

Post by Dylan16807 » Mon, Nov 26, 2018, 12:05 AM UTC

qw wrote: post #251

arghwhat wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither does it seem fair that I'll be fined twice as much if I work twice the hours, does it?

A fine is supposed to discourage people from breaking the law. Is it fair that wealthy people can ignore the laws because they do not feel any real consequenes? I have heard drivers who constantly break the rules, because they can easily afford the fine. To them the occasional fine is just the price they have to pay for easy parking, or saving a minute on their drive. What alternative do you suggest?

Post by Dylan16807 » Mon, Nov 26, 2018, 12:13 AM UTC

monadgonad wrote: post #267

arghwhat wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither does it seem fair that I'll be fined twice as much if I work twice the hours, does it?

Yes, yes it does!

Post by Dylan16807 » Mon, Nov 26, 2018, 12:22 AM UTC

eponeponepon wrote: post #286

wgerard wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Post by eponeponepon » Mon, Nov 26, 2018, 12:24 AM UTC

Dylan16807 wrote: post #295

eponeponepon wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I'm sure it works fine in practice, but it's still not ideal if you can put one foot into the street and oblige cars to slam on their brakes.

Post by thrower123 » Mon, Nov 26, 2018, 12:29 AM UTC

icebraining wrote: post #298

cc439 wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

License suspension is already used a lot. In fact, it's such a deterrent that states started using it for various non-traffic related punishments, such as failure to pay child support or drug conviction: https://www.npr.org/2014/03/10/288587071/reconsidering-drive...