11–20 of 683 posts
Reform requires reform of both the government and industry. Industry will happily gather the data and the state will then buy it from industry as a means to circumvent the 4th amendment.
https://reason.com/2024/08/20/how-the-feds-buy-their-way-aro...
This makes me _not_ want to get a Tesla, just to avoid the inconvenience of getting my car towed because of what it _might_ have inside of it. And the opposite, doing what Ring is doing and simply streaming it to the police directly, might be easier but I still believe a major privacy concern. Sure, it could be helpful. But at what cost?
>This makes me _not_ want to get a Tesla, just to avoid the inconvenience of getting my car towed because of what it _might_ have inside of it. From the article: >Therriault said he and other officers now frequently seek video from bystander Teslas, and usually get the owners’ consent to download it without having to serve a warrant. Still, he said, tows are sometimes necessary, if police can’t locate a Tesla owner a…
Genuine question: What is stopping some small percent of drivers from installing cameras and using ML to identify cars driving dangerously (e.g. speeding, running reds, changing multiple lanes at once, etc.), and when their license plate is identifiable, finding and informing their insurance company? If even a small subset of users did this, and insurers did something with this information, it would substantially dis…
>If even a small subset of users did this, and insurers did something with this information, it would substantially disincentivize driving like a complete maniac. People who drive like complete maniacs aren't doing so rationally. It's called "road rage" not "road reason."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>This makes me _not_ want to get a Tesla, just to avoid the inconvenience of getting my car towed because of what it _might_ have inside of it. From the article: >Therriault said he and other officers now frequently seek video from bystander Teslas, and usually get the owners’ consent to download it without having to serve a warrant. Still, he said, tows are sometimes necessary, if police can’t locate a Tesla owner a…
The fact that they're doing it at all is completely unacceptable.
I used to keep my Sentry mode on all the time. Then my car got broken into twice. The police didn’t bother to follow up despite having a video footage of what happened. Now I never turn it on. And now police wants to tow vehicles for the footage.
This makes me _not_ want to get a Tesla, just to avoid the inconvenience of getting my car towed because of what it _might_ have inside of it. And the opposite, doing what Ring is doing and simply streaming it to the police directly, might be easier but I still believe a major privacy concern. Sure, it could be helpful. But at what cost?
>This makes me _not_ want to get a Tesla, just to avoid the inconvenience of getting my car towed because of what it _might_ have inside of it. From the article: >Therriault said he and other officers now frequently seek video from bystander Teslas, and usually get the owners’ consent to download it without having to serve a warrant. Still, he said, tows are sometimes necessary, if police can’t locate a Tesla owner a…
Genuine question: What is stopping some small percent of drivers from installing cameras and using ML to identify cars driving dangerously (e.g. speeding, running reds, changing multiple lanes at once, etc.), and when their license plate is identifiable, finding and informing their insurance company? If even a small subset of users did this, and insurers did something with this information, it would substantially dis…
It would probably have "disproportionate impact." It's really the job of police forces to act on maniac drivers. And they stopped doing so in 2020 for the same reason.
Do you really think everyone is just insured because it's the law? If so, you're fairly naive. Try leaving the bubble you live in now and then. Oakland cops stopping responding to anything less than murder at lot sooner than 2020 lmao.
Genuine question: What is stopping some small percent of drivers from installing cameras and using ML to identify cars driving dangerously (e.g. speeding, running reds, changing multiple lanes at once, etc.), and when their license plate is identifiable, finding and informing their insurance company? If even a small subset of users did this, and insurers did something with this information, it would substantially dis…
>If even a small subset of users did this, and insurers did something with this information, it would substantially disincentivize driving like a complete maniac. People who drive like complete maniacs aren't doing so rationally. It's called "road rage" not "road reason."
It's happening. Cameras everywhere all the time. No more anonymity in public soon. Hopefully this will improve behavior generally, though at possibly great cost.
People will move out of the cities onto land where they can remove/shoot down cameras. The cities and policing are too aggressive with their big brother tactics, thinking FUD about crime is a good enough reason to take away privacy from people. It is actually a minority opinion that the country wants this but no one votes in local elections anymore so the minority wins.
Also it's not drones that are an issue. It's ring cameras and car cameras and CCTV cameras.
Genuine question: What is stopping some small percent of drivers from installing cameras and using ML to identify cars driving dangerously (e.g. speeding, running reds, changing multiple lanes at once, etc.), and when their license plate is identifiable, finding and informing their insurance company? If even a small subset of users did this, and insurers did something with this information, it would substantially dis…