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

Opposition to Sidewalk Labs in Toronto

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–108 of 108 posts

Re: Opposition to Sidewalk Labs in Toronto

#101

Post by collective-intl »

I'm truly saddened to see the reaction people are having to Sidewalk Labs' project. The current feeling in the air is to distrust and hate any project touched by a large tech company and be suspicious of any amount of data collected.

The environment today is such that both journalists and readers just want to pile on and make their points speaking out against privacy intrusions and the greed of big companies.

No one's bothered to understand the actual proposals of Sidewalk Labs and give them a fair chance.

For example, in contrast to what this article says, Sidewalk Labs would not own and profit from resident's data -- instead they are trying to be as careful as possible and leaving it to an independent organization (https://www.sidewalklabs.com/blog/an-update-on-data-governan...).

Many cool ideas comprise Sidewalk Labs' vision, from the layout of a walkable community to convenient autonomous transport to pushing the leading edge of power conservation, waste management, and other eco-friendly tech.

In the age of dysfunctional cities like San Francisco, I had hope that a project bringing together a broad array of talented experts with real technical competence and letting them envision a model for cities of the future was a winning combination with huge potential for humanity.

Tragically, it has been doomed by the caprice of political fashion.

Re: Opposition to Sidewalk Labs in Toronto

#102

Post by TAForObvReasons »

collective-intl wrote: post #101

I'm truly saddened to see the reaction people are having to Sidewalk Labs' project. The current feeling in the air is to distrust and hate any project touched by a large tech company and be suspicious of any amount of data collected. The environment today is such that both journalists and readers just want to pile on and make their points speaking out against privacy intrusions and the greed of big companies. No one'…

Google Fiber in Louisville is a great case study. Google thought there was a business wherein they could cheaply provide connectivity to users. Then there were problems, like exposed lines, and it became clear that fixing those problems would cost money. In that moment, they abruptly decided to bail, essentially leaving the city with the burden of fixing the mess Google created and leaving the early customers who committed to multi-year contracts only a few months to switch providers.

Politicians have to think longer term than what the current players in tech have demonstrated. This is 100% a self-created problem

Re: Opposition to Sidewalk Labs in Toronto

#103

Post by Redoubts »

ip26 wrote: post #99
Redoubts wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, if outside speculators can wreck your housing prices, then your local government ducked up zoning and development laws really badly.

How do you figure? A blind flood of money breaks most markets.

Because they should be a small fraction of your market. If they have outsides weight like this, then you’ve been constraining your housing for decades.

Re: Opposition to Sidewalk Labs in Toronto

#104

Post by rory096 »

hedora wrote: post #90
rory096 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This article has poor fact-checking. For example, the quote by the Queen's University professor is not accurate (or, charitably, outdated as of the time of publishing). >The proposal amounts to “permanent surveillance” and “massive data scraping” under the guise of fighting climate change, he said. >“They are conducting an experiment in real time, in the real world: the privatization of our cities on a large scale. T…

Presumably, if the Civic Data Trust proposal was more than a shell game, Sidewalk Lab’s privacy chief wouldn’t have said they were building a surveillance system in the resignation letter.

I don't see how a civic data trust is mutually exclusive with a surveillance state — it just provides common ownership and open access to the surveillance data. It seems Cavoukian's dispute centered on the lack of a requirement for third-party (non-Alphabet) data providers to anonymize data at the source.

Re: Opposition to Sidewalk Labs in Toronto

#105

Post by hammock »

matz1 wrote: post #26
hammock wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That works if the only places you visit are work and home.

Living in company housing means I can't visit anywhere else?

No, wanting to surveil someone 24/7 when you only have sensors at home and work means they can't visit anywhere else.

Re: Opposition to Sidewalk Labs in Toronto

#106

Post by ip26 »

Redoubts wrote: post #103
ip26 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you figure? A blind flood of money breaks most markets.

Because they should be a small fraction of your market. If they have outsides weight like this, then you’ve been constraining your housing for decades.

I'm not familiar with Toronto but foreign speculators are reportedly about 10% of real estate transactions in Vancouver. Just how much more housing were they supposed to have built?

Re: Opposition to Sidewalk Labs in Toronto

#107

Post by matz1 »

hammock wrote: post #105
matz1 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Living in company housing means I can't visit anywhere else?

No, wanting to surveil someone 24/7 when you only have sensors at home and work means they can't visit anywhere else.

okay but how does it prevent them to visit anywhere else ?

Re: Opposition to Sidewalk Labs in Toronto

#108

Post by hammock »

matz1 wrote: post #107
hammock wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, wanting to surveil someone 24/7 when you only have sensors at home and work means they can't visit anywhere else.

okay but how does it prevent them to visit anywhere else ?

That was my point.
Post reply on HN