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

Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

wltx.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–166 of 166 posts

Re: Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

#161

Post by iso1631 »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #148
saalweachter wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are "the actual safe limits of modern cars"? Data from various states raising their limits over the last few decades is that every 5MPH increase in state speed limits brings with it an 8.5% increase in traffic fatalities on freeways. With the 70MPH speed limit common for freeways through most of the US, we're already up 25% on road fatalities over the 55MPH that was chosen for gas mileage during the oil crisis.…

Nobody goes 70 mph on freeways. They go 80 mph on that road because it's the speed of traffic. If you declared a "speed limit reset" and raised the speed limit to 80 mph, people won't be going 90 mph. They will be going the speed limit.

In the UK 80-90 was quite normal 25 years ago, and off peak you'd find the outside lane of the M40 doing over 90 a fair amount

It's not today as there's far more traffic. It's rare to have the opportunity outside of a few areas (south of Bristol on the M5, north of Kendal on the M6 etc). When I first learned to drive I'd do M62 to M5 in well under an hour, today it's about 20 minutes longer.

Re: Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

#162

Post by FireBeyond »

SAI_Peregrinus wrote: post #146
bubblewand wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dunno. We got car insurance once that had a "put this spy device in your car for a couple weeks for a lower rate" deal and I felt like I was driving a lot less-safely when I was constantly worried about looking like I was driving safely. Like, to pick an example that's specifically speed-limit related, if more people really tried hard to do 25MPH (the marked speed limit on many of them) or under for the entire leng…

I've never seen an interstate off-ramp in the US with a 25MPH speed limit (white sign). I've seen 25MPH advisories (yellow sign), but those aren't a legal limit. Advisory signs are the maximum safe speed for the worst possible conditions (road covered in ice). I otherwise agree.

Interstate, no, and actual speed limit, no, but the one I always think of is this, on US 101, near Steamboat Island in Olympia where you come off a 60mph two lane state highway to an off-ramp that is 430' long and has an advisory 10mph speed for a very unforgiving 90/180 degree turn (160' diameter circle) - with the ability to rear-end people joining the highway if you miss the first part of the turn or the ability to t-bone people if you miss the second. ChatGPT describes the braking required as being at the high end of moderate, almost hard braking, for a sustained 9 seconds to slow sufficiently to make the turn, assuming you start braking the moment you are in the exit lane (and there's no advanced warning, just a single "10mph" yellow sign as you enter that lane): https://imgur.com/a/uns86kp

Re: Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

#163

Post by FireBeyond »

tsimionescu wrote: post #72
Thorrez wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speeding is a special case, because it's unclear what the lawmakers, road designers, and police intend. When the speed limit is 65 mph, do they actually intend for everyone to go no faster? I don't think so. I think the lawmakers, if driving in traffic, want people to go a bit faster. Same with the police. And I think the road designers design the roads knowing most people will speed. I want to follow the law. But wh…

> When the speed limit is 65 mph, do they actually intend for everyone to go no faster? I don't think so. Where is this supposed ambiguity coming from?

In Washington state, the State Patrol has gone on the record multiple times and with the media saying their enforcement is based on "Under 10 over", i.e. they won't pull you over for doing 69 or less on the Interstate in a 60 zone, or 79 or less in a 70 (assuming speed is the only issue).

Re: Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

#164

Post by AlexeyBelov »

_slih wrote: post #159

shutting down the cameras rather than releasing the data tells you everything about what was being collected. the system was designed around the assumption that nobody outside law enforcement would ever see the footage.

LLM comment.

Re: Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

#165

Post by ben_w »

tln wrote: post #115
ben_w wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

4 strikes today with current speed enforcement is fine; 4 strikes in a hypothetical where 100% of infractions are caught, I aver will catch (almost) everyone who actually drives within a month.

If notice of the infractions is a envelope delivered days later and sitting on on end table for a week, typical drivers are going to rack up 4 strikes before seeing the first one! Perfect enforcement has to come with immediate feedback

Agreed.

You may be amused/horrified to know that the UK police managed to send me a speeding ticket letter for a car I'd sold 6 months before the offence.

I only owned the car for a week, to sell on behalf of my partner who had moved abroad.

Re: Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

#166

Post by JCattheATM »

ProllyInfamous wrote: post #84
fc417fc802 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mind a local AI on an airgapped security camera network monitoring a camera and issuing an alert to a security guard. The issues are internet connectivity, data retention/mining/sale, and non-local processing (ie handing stuff off to a third party that does who knows what and probably doesn't take security seriously).

I just watched Enemy of the State (late 1990s sequel to The Conversation [1974]) — one of the major plot elements is having to physically acquire the footage/tape (from isolated witnesses/cameras) ; whereas today, everything feeds into one central company [0]. [0] whom then repackages streams and sells to anybody — mostly law-enforcement — with no 4th Amendment protections ('cause it's a private company brah! ).

> I just watched Enemy of the State (late 1990s sequel to The Conversation [1974])

Not officially, just as a fun fan theory.

Post reply on HN