511–520 of 683 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://bigthink.com/strange-maps/road-deaths-us-eu/ Seems to be more of an issue in the US.
Definitely: bigger vehicles, higher speeds, and because the alternatives to driving have been starved of funding or removed the entire system is loathe to punish bad drivers because taking away someone’s license largely removes their ability to function.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Freedom does not require Liberty because Freedom does not require the state. Liberties are granted, not natural, Freedoms. Freedom sounds great and people love to hype it, but doesn’t exist in a meaningful way in most advanced societies. If we’re going to use proper nouns, we need to use them properly.
Go live in the remote wilderness in your cabin. The rest of this will live within civilized society with our necessary liberties, thank you very much.
Liberties are fine, but don’t act like Freedom exists in modern society (or maybe any society) for the exact reason your flippant dismissal implies: the needs of other people. A poor invocation of Franklin indeed.
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's illegal, even in rural areas, to shoot down drones. Also it's not drones that are an issue. It's ring cameras and car cameras and CCTV cameras.
It’s different depending on the municipality. Your initial statement is not exclusively true of every inch of land in the US. Furthermore any illegality is limited to what any small police department can actually do about it.
18 U.S. Code § 32 makes it specifically illegal to damage or interfere with the operation of aircraft.
The FAA takes this quite seriously, as not taking it seriously compromises their position of being able to regulate drones per se. Lax enforcement of protection of drones as aircraft is a potential legal argument that efforts to regulate drone activity outside of the scope of interference with manned aircraft are similarly deprecated in importance and legitimacy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s different depending on the municipality. Your initial statement is not exclusively true of every inch of land in the US. Furthermore any illegality is limited to what any small police department can actually do about it.
I'm pretty sure it's the FAA that dictates that one. It's federally illegal. And how motivated are they? Well I'm assuming someone will complain that you shot down their drone. And most police are very interested in firearm crimes. The FAA is also very interested in people who shoot at aircraft of any kind.
Also, thank you for a kind and thoughtful comment you made to me in the past. It’s heartening to be reminded that civil decency is alive and well.
I hope you have a memorable and fruitful day.
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. Once that happens insurance companies will start charging more for people that drive themselves compared to people that let the car drive. I can see some states outlawing that practice. Then it’s left to see who is still und…
> 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…
What you said is true, but does not reflect reality.
Today The Model 3 is ~$40k, and once self driving is "solved", there is no reason a ~$40k car won't be capable of it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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 ever…
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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 ever…
While self driving cars are provided by private companies, self driving cars will first work in the profitable cases, and then years later will still only work in the profitable cases.
Obviously many other manufacturers will also sell consumer cars that can completely drive themselves.
Even a person who lives in Tok, Alaska will just be able to buy one and then sleep in the car as it drives down the Alaska Highway*
* Trust me, once you've driven it a handful of times it's a chore.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>"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 c…
I think also it is worth distinguishing between corporate surveillance, where there are very few limits on what they can do with the data, vs government surveillance where we can exert some power over the government by electing people to pass laws that reflect our desire for privacy.
As well, I am surprised HN has not internalized Brin's essay "The Transparent Society." Privacy is going to be deeply reduced by the ability of all curious 13 year olds to launch insect sized drones. The question is how to handle - let only the overseers have the data or insist on public right to access data. Or something else; like laws forcing personal ownership of your data (although how things like being in the background of your neighbors cameras as you walk down the street should be handled there I am not sure.).
I would also point out that freedom and privacy aren't identical - one may have freedom via privacy or via less intrusive laws. (Ed: deleted incomplete thought).