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

Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

sfchronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 683 posts

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#441

Post by [deleted] »

harmmonica wrote: post #411
hansvm wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> freedom crowd might fight it Look at the 2020 covid vaccines. The freedom crowd said this was going to have massive privacy implications, there was a propaganda machine pushing those people as being crazy antivaxers (maybe many were, let's talk about the large subset who just had privacy concerns), and the net result is that most US citizens have their names, addresses, preferred vaccination locations, preferred va…

I'm not going to respond to your Covid commentary in an effort to avoid going down a rabbit hole, but I should say that when I wrote "freedom crowd" it's not some monolith. Specifically, I think there are plenty of freedom-minded folks across the political spectrum, and I do believe that those folks, again, across the spectrum, are going to have a hard time accepting self-driving cars en masse because of the privacy…

[deleted]

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#442

Post by TomK32 »

pmichaud wrote: post #152
rbalicki wrote: post #6

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…

Setting aside the obvious dystopian next steps, I think the main problem with automated traffic law enforcement is that our laws are quite bad in the sense that they rely on enforcement being loose and somewhat subjective to even work at all. The speeds on various roads, the timing of traffic lights, the places one can park and for how long, etc, are not carefully planned or thought out enough to actually work if eve…

It's not laws that are bad, it's the infrastructure. Wide roads that give the driver the feeling that it is safe to drive a 60 mph when the sign says 45.

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#443

Post by sneak »

FpUser wrote: post #176
papichulo4 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like if it’s technically possible, it will happen, and we can’t stop technological progress. In fact, you and I are probably profiting from that progress. Hard to ask a guy to do something that goes against his paycheck. Even if we vote politically “correct,” whomever that may be, what are you and I voting for with our wallets?

>"we can’t stop technological progress" I do not want to stop tech progress, but I do want to stop social regress. Give it another 20-30 years and we will have same shit problems with freedoms as China, Russia, insert your fav scapegoat here.

There is no difference to what the USA and UK have done and continue to do to Assange and what China and Russia do to journalists they don’t like.

The idea that the west are the “good guys” hasn’t been true for a long time, if ever. China is just better at technology and large scale coordination than the US, so they are way better at building and deploying and operating large scale surveillance systems. The US will catch up in a few decades.

I believe this is inevitable. There is no meaningful opposition to pervasive surveillance in US government and there is no useful political action that can be undertaken by the public to turn this tide.

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#444

Post by TomK32 »

XorNot wrote: post #395
mauvehaus wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is actually a problem with speed limits that don't match the road or alternatively, roads that aren't designed to incentivize people driving the intended speed. In theory, the speed limit should be set to the 80th or 85th percentile speed of traffic, and the road should be engineered so that the 80th percentile speed is appropriate to the surroundings. https://www.mikeontraffic.com/85th-percentile-speed-explaine…

I'm extremely skeptical of this idea of "speed limits which don't match the road" unless people are arguing them down. Because the whole point is that people reliably overestimate their driving ability, and thus overestimate the safe rate of travel on a road. The road I live on displays this all the time , and that's just an advisory road: the speed limit going down the winding slope near my house is about 50 kmh...t…

You live on an extreme road where road engineering can't do much due to the given environment and possibly low budget if the road is not that important. Though anything that slows vehicles before entering this stretch of road, or a much less harmful obstacle to heighten their awareness could improve the situation.

Roads where planners have a literal blank sheet is where roads need to be designed better to slow down drivers to the desired speed limit. Sometimes it's as simple as adding traffic islands for pedestrians, narrowing the road or planing trees next to the road.

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#445

Post by hansvm »

harmmonica wrote: post #411
hansvm wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> freedom crowd might fight it Look at the 2020 covid vaccines. The freedom crowd said this was going to have massive privacy implications, there was a propaganda machine pushing those people as being crazy antivaxers (maybe many were, let's talk about the large subset who just had privacy concerns), and the net result is that most US citizens have their names, addresses, preferred vaccination locations, preferred va…

I'm not going to respond to your Covid commentary in an effort to avoid going down a rabbit hole, but I should say that when I wrote "freedom crowd" it's not some monolith. Specifically, I think there are plenty of freedom-minded folks across the political spectrum, and I do believe that those folks, again, across the spectrum, are going to have a hard time accepting self-driving cars en masse because of the privacy…

That isn't a political statement. The flow from "we won't shove you in a database" to "the non-existent database was leaked" is something that's independently verifiable.

> left/right

Yes, many people care about freedom

> going to have a hard time accepting self-driving cars

I'm usually optimistic, but I don't think public sentiment matters here. To the extent it does, it'll be some sort of Faustian bargain, where the law says your car must have a backup camera (arguably useful) and as a byproduct brings in unwanted, undisclosed tracking and also remote takeover capabilities through radio bugs (buffer overflows plus poorly designed canbus access). However self-driving inflicts itself on the masses, it'll be in a series of small enough steps that the freedom crowd can't appropriately fight back.

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#446

Post by Corrado »

mft_ wrote: post #236
pmichaud wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Setting aside the obvious dystopian next steps, I think the main problem with automated traffic law enforcement is that our laws are quite bad in the sense that they rely on enforcement being loose and somewhat subjective to even work at all. The speeds on various roads, the timing of traffic lights, the places one can park and for how long, etc, are not carefully planned or thought out enough to actually work if eve…

I’m struggling to understand your point, or to imagine many examples which support it. I agree that brief minor parking infringements may occasionally make people’s lives more efficient; but I can’t think of any examples where traffic lights and speed limits need to be routinely disregarded?

I was just discussing this with my wife while driving on the local expressway on a clear Saturday afternoon. The speed limit is 55 MPH but everyone was moving at 70 MPH without any issues. The road is wide and straight with limited on/off ramps and the faster speed felt very natural.

This is a common occurrence on this road and everyone seems to abide pretty well. Sure, there is the occasional "idiot" doing stupid things (weaving in out of traffic, speeding up / slowing down, etc.) but for the most part it just works.

The big problem is when a LEO is around. Everyone slows down to 55ish MPH and traffic backs up and people do weird things.

However, I don't know the solution. If we raise the speed limit to 70 MPH does that mean that people will then feel comfortable going 80 or 90 MPH? If we lower the speed limit to 30 MPH will that cause everyone to only go 55 MPH? This piece of road just feels right and natural at 70 MPH; everyone seems to think so, if unconsciously. Will changing the laws "fix" this piece of road?

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#447

Post by sneak »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #365
alkonaut wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it legal to film anywhere? In Sweden filming in public places with fixed equipment (a car counts apparently) is illegal. But on the other hand any evidence is admitted in court, even material obtained while breaking a law. So there has been a few cases where police have caught the person vandalizing the car and also needed to consider whether to fine the owner.

In the US, it is legal to film anywhere public (out on the street, in a government building, etc). You can even film inside of private establishments (restaurants, stores) until you have been asked to stop. This is part of the protection of free speech and press. You cannot use the footage gathered for commercial purposes without permission of people you filmed. Journalism for pay, and art for pay are not considered…

*asked to stop by the owner. you are within your rights to film or photograph other restaurant patrons even if those being filmed don’t like it. it is up to the owner of the property.

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#448

Post by Ylpertnodi »

nothercastle wrote: post #350

There are already plenty of cameras out there. It would not be very difficult to identify criminals. The problem is there is not sufficient motivation to do so and nobody knows what to do once the criminals are identified. My city just practices catch and release policing so laws only apply to those that will pay fines

>so laws only apply to those that will pay fines.

So, penalising the poors who are not as poor as the other poors.

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#449

Post by TeMPOraL »

chefandy wrote: post #327
threecheese wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am hoping for an urban camouflage fashion revolution as a response to more pervasive monitoring: https://www.axios.com/2019/09/07/fooling-facial-recognition-... Public access to object recognition models may be important.

I'd like to see that too, but time and time again we've seen that: a) laypeople aren't usually moved by privacy violations more abstract than someone physically watching you do something. b) most people aren't willing to don practical accessories that noticably change the perception of your face unless it emphasizes qualities considered sexy. c) safety gear generally isn't considered sexy I think that this stuff woul…

Also d) it's easier to update face recognition ML to see through the latest in camouflage fashion than to design, manufacture and sell new clothes after each update to the ML model. Especially that they need to keep fooling previous versions of the model too.

Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla

#450

Post by kelnos »

threecheese wrote: post #273
harmmonica wrote: post #247

As a somewhat regular user of Waymo, these types of conversations seem like they're going to be more and more in the (sorry!) rearview mirror because we won't own the car nor the cameras that are recording the world as we "drive" around. That's not to say that we should give up fighting for some level of privacy even when we don't own the cars, but seems more likely that legislation would be passed that forces the ve…

I am hoping for an urban camouflage fashion revolution as a response to more pervasive monitoring: https://www.axios.com/2019/09/07/fooling-facial-recognition-... Public access to object recognition models may be important.

I think it's safe to assume that 0.0000001% of the population will bother with that.
Post reply on HN