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

481–490 of 683 posts

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

#481

Post by johnisgood »

acdha wrote: post #351
repeekad wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not the point, a surveillance state where the panopticon autonomously gives $250 tickets is the issue Rules aren’t meant to be cold hard algorithms to blindly punish people with; we wouldn’t automate a judge with an algorithm why is it somehow different to automate a police officer with one?

It’s hardly a surveillance state to say operators of heavy machinery should do so safely: there are many, many dead pedestrians and bicyclists who were hit by someone who _thought_ the road was empty, and American traffic laws are so lenient that it’s disturbing that people think they’re overbearing. It’s estimated that we are effectively subsidizing drivers by close to a trillion dollars annually by not requiring ad…

https://bigthink.com/strange-maps/road-deaths-us-eu/

Seems to be more of an issue in the US.

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

#482

Post by johnisgood »

kelnos wrote: post #459
try_the_bass wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is that not the point? You violated a law and received a penalty. You're not disputing that you violated said law, but are instead trying to justify it with "barely didn't stop" and "it's 3am and there is no traffic". Isn't the point that you got punished for doing something you would have gotten away with had no one been watching?

I don't actually disagree with some level of automated enforcement, but I do disagree with your phrasing/justification of it. I just don't believe violating the law is always wrong, always bad, or always unsafe. While I would agree that most people are bad at risk assessment, and most people are not good drivers, the law should be flexible enough to deal with cases where breaking it is absolutely fine to do. As a per…

Or sometimes it is the death sentence.

I agree with you, FWIW.

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

#483

Post by throwaway2037 »

johnisgood wrote: post #479
1997cui wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just FYI, it is illegal to mask your face in New York https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna168590

So it is illegal to wear a hijab / niqab?

To be clear, a baseball hides more of your face than a hijab. (Niqab is a different story.)

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

#484

Post by johnisgood »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #42
andylynch wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Insurers may not be the best recipients given most of those things are criminal matters. In my country, most police forces accept dashcam evidence from other road users, and will prosecute on it. It’s seen be the police as a great road safety tool.

Is there a risk such video could be fabricated to frame someone for a crime they didn't commit, or even that never happened?

With deepfake AI? Absolutely. You do not even need AI, you just need to time it just right (or crop the video).

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

#485

Post by grecy »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #461
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…

> This commentary assumes self-driving cars are here to stay and become the de facto way we drive instead of driving ourselves. This seems like an extremely myopic "tech bubble" take to me. I'm trying to find a way to put this so that it doesn't sound like an attack, but have you been to suburban or rural areas outside of places like SF, NYC or Phoenix? Being reliant on third party transportation, on roads the are of…

> is a nonstarter for probably most of the US population.

I disagree.

I grew up in Rural Australia, lived in the Yukon and have driven to many of the world's most remote and undeveloped countries.

You are saying "Self driving cars will NEVER work in "

When what you mean to say is "Self driving cars will first work in the easy cases, and then years later will work in more and more cases until they eventually work everywhere."

FWIW, people said exactly the same thing when the automobile came around and horses were the best transport. Of course automobiles didn't work well in places with no gas stations or very nasty horse tracks for many years. But the years will always roll on, and things will change.

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

#486

Post by johnisgood »

eddd-ddde wrote: post #232
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…

I have 100% thought about a drivers rating system where users rate other drivers. Even better, not only notify insurance companies, but notify other drivers that the idiot in front of them is dangerous so they can react.

You should watch Black Mirror.

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

#487

Post by j4_james »

johnisgood wrote: post #479
1997cui wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just FYI, it is illegal to mask your face in New York https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna168590

So it is illegal to wear a hijab / niqab?

Answered in the article:

> However, it has exemptions for health and religious reasons.

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

#488

Post by throwaway2037 »

vineyardmike wrote: post #409
Vegenoid wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's about 33% in dense areas and 55% in suburban areas. Which actually doesn't improve the driving situation. Are the suburbs not one of the easier places for autonomous vehicles? I’d think the lower traffic, larger roads, and reliance on cars to get around (due to low density and lack of transit) would make them the ideal place for self-driving cars to succeed.

I don’t agree. The problem is suburbs have a lower cost-per-mile for trips than urban areas. It’s way more common to take a taxi in the city than the ‘burbs. Behavior for car ownership and expectations around waiting on rides is different. Self driving taxis are an easy transition in cities. In the suburbs, you need to sell people on expensive vehicles that cost a lot per trip (whether owned or hailed).

    > suburbs have a lower cost-per-mile for trips than urban areas.
Can you explain why?

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

#489

Post by sokoloff »

adrianN wrote: post #429
vineyardmike wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think this plays out where it becomes a luxury to drive oneself. Over the next 10-15 years it looks like self driving will continue to advance and will likely become safer than the alternative. I think this is a long way away and will vary geographically. For a long time, self driving cars will be more expensive because they’ll have expensive sensors on it. Not many people will want a $100K self driving car inste…

I wouldn’t be surprised if safety requirements will gradually tighten until every car will need most sensors. Manufacturers have an interest in selling expensive difficult to manufacture cars and politicians like to reduce traffic fatalities.

The average age of a car in the US is 12.6 years old right now. History shows that we’ve not forced safety items into existing cars. (I have one car where I would be permitted to pass safety inspection without seat belts (any) because it wasn’t originally equipped. [I have chosen to add them.])

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

#490

Post by throwaway2037 »

azthecx wrote: post #394
throwaway22032 wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you that driving manually will become a luxury but it's important to recognise that it will manifest as a discount on self driving, not a surcharge on manual. The only way in which I can see a surcharge on manual happening is if it becomes so incredibly rare that it becomes a niche product, or if there ends up being a bias e.g. it turns out that the pool of manual drivers is now biased towards people who…

And historically has this competitive market manifested itself? Or have insurance companies instead vastly changed from their 'distributed risk' origins and instead act more as corporate entities with profits at the forefront, where the moment you actually use them the cost of being insured rises?

I don't think insurance companies need to distribute risk from auto insurance. They do, however, need it for property insurance. Floods, earthquakes, and fires and level thousands of homes quickly. There isn't any risk like that for driving.
Post reply on HN