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

AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

caixinglobal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 416 posts

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#361

Post by Dylan16807 »

toomanybeersies wrote: post #354
Dylan16807 wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bit of a tangent, but all the roads I've seen labeled 30mph or 35mph would be quite safe to take at 45. The flow of traffic is 5mph over anyway. But this is with residential roads universally at 25mph. I'm not sure what kind of road he was on.

Urban speed limits aren't set by what speed your car is safe to drive at, but rather what speed is safe that you're less likely to hit pedestrians and other cars.

A road has to be designed a certain way based on the speed. You can't just put up a speed limit sign, and speed limit signs are very often not based on what's safe.

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#362

Post by coldtea »

rarrarrarr wrote: post #270
coldtea wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, like Anacharsis told to Solon (the lawmaker) in 6 BC Athens: "[Your] laws are no different from spiders' webs. They'll restrain anyone weak and insignificant who gets caught in them, but they'll be torn to shreds by people with power and wealth".

That's a nice quote -- I wasn't familiar with Anacharsis, so I read up on him. For what it's worth, considering he came to Athens in 589 BC[0], I think your date of 6 BC is a little off. [0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anacharsis

For what it's worth, I meant 6th century BC (seeing that I mentioned Solon et al, and not Romans being around).

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#363

Post by donkeyd »

Fnoord wrote: post #344
askvictor wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Finland, I believe, scales fines proportionally to your income. Not perfect (the rich can more easily hide their income than the not so rich), but a good start.

We got a point system in The Netherlands. If you get too many points, you lose your license. However it only counts for new drivers. Which doesn't make sense at all, as its elitist towards the older adults.

Until you take a look at statistics on age vs. number of accidents. Young people ([0] https://www.swov.nl/feiten-cijfers/factsheet/18-tot-en-met-2...

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#364

Post by Dylan16807 »

pjc50 wrote: post #348
Dylan16807 wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I said "can", I meant by the rules, not the laws of physics. The car is morally obligated to try not to hit anyone no matter what, but that's not what I'm talking about. And the picture I have in mind isn't someone suicidally leaping in front of a car, it's someone taking one step to order the cars to stop. This would be fine if there was a "reasonable stopping rate" clause, but it doesn't sound like there is.

So what? People don't do this deliberately very often because there's always the risk that the driver doesn't stop. If you try edging into the road you'll get honked at. The concept of jaywalking has never made any sense to me as a Brit; it's like that joke sign meme of "Danger of death and £20 fine".

If your response to "this works but is not ideal" is "people don't abuse it very often" then I think we agree. I'm not arguing for any particular change.

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#365

Post by TheGrumpyBrit »

ksec wrote: post #341
arrrg wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn’t so much that the rich can hide their income more easily, it‘s that the value of money doesn’t increase linearly. The more money you have available, the less valuable any additional unit of money is to you and the less it hurts if money is taken away from you. Proportional fines help, but they aren’t perfectly fair.

Then fine by Net Worth and not by Income. Fine by Tax paid. And made it like the Tax system the more you have the higher percentage. There are people who just park their car anywhere and paid parking tickets, they really don't care because it was too small amount of money. If anything, people should realise the level of inequality has become. How unfair and unjust the system has made against the bottom half of the po…

I don't think it's possible to find a fair solution that's purely financially based. On the one hand, the poorest members of society might be unable to feed themselves on even a $50 fine. Unless you propose to bankrupt somebody for a speeding ticket, there's just no way to make any amount of fine sting as much for the richest members of society.

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#366

Post by TheGrumpyBrit »

thrower123 wrote: post #299
icebraining wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

License suspension is already used a lot. In fact, it's such a deterrent that states started using it for various non-traffic related punishments, such as failure to pay child support or drug conviction: https://www.npr.org/2014/03/10/288587071/reconsidering-drive...

Taking someone's license for not paying child support has always struck me as stupidly counter-productive, if you want someone to work and actually be capable to pay their child support.

It's also completely unrelated to the crime. How would you punish somebody who already doesn't have a driving license?

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#367

Post by QasimK »

esotericn wrote: post #155
will_brown wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s funny but at the end of the day what youre talking about is the realization of idiocracy through our implementation of shitty “automation” using software. I mean basically you have a computer system where the court system, law enforcement and DMV are all saying your license is expired for failure to pay...when you actually paid. Now you are getting more tickets and basically stuck in an infinite loop of hell. I’…

Pretty much. The same exists in the UK in all sorts of fields. My preferred strategy is repeated escalation mixed with what I'd call some variant of baby language. "You owe me X, please send me X, your internal processes are broken, please send me X". "No, I don't care about your internal processes, you owe me X, please send me X." "You haven't sent me X yet; can you send me X or do I need to initiate legal action?"…

I’ve always had excellent, and prompt customer service from Amazon. I’m curious to know what kinds of issues have you encountered where you were unhappy with how they dealt with it?

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#368

Post by Dylan16807 »

Udik wrote: post #350
Dylan16807 wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on what the law is for. For example you could have a nice solid fine for littering, with half of it earmarked for public cleaning/improvement. If someone violates that and reliably pays the cost, it's win-win. They get to be lazy and the environment is improved.

Since littering means degrading the appearance of a public space for some amount of time, it's hard yo put a price on it: the maximum fine should be the cost of a person assigned exclusively to you, who immediately picks up whatever you throw to the ground and nicely dispose of it in the appropriate way. What you say would make sense in case of unpaid fares. In the case of speeding, there is no amount of money that c…

No amount? I disagree. The speed limit is inherently a balance between safety and time-efficiency. You can convert time-efficiency into money, and figure out a monetary cost of different speeds. Even if it's an absolute mandate to keep safety levels the same, you could cut everyone else's speed by 1kph and make it up to them with a share of the money. Or you could subsidize safer cars with the money.

And at a certain price point you can call in a police escort or start installing express lanes.

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#369

Post by salvar »

bicubic wrote: post #347
cc439 wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That just screws the middle class (~$40k to $150k). The cost of waging legal warfare against the ticket will still be greater than the inflated fine while the wealthy will easily be able to afford the kind of lawyer who can get an overworked traffic court judge and the cop who has to take a day off from fieldwork to agree to more reasonable terms. The solution to fines is to simply get rid of fines and instead use a…

> The solution to fines is to simply get rid of fines and instead use a more aggressive "point" system. You're assuming the problem that fines address is modifying driver behaviour. It isn't. The primary problem fines address is revenue.

That's quite the brush you're painting with there. Is the primary motivation behind fining the same everywhere?

Re: AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With Jaywalking

#370

Post by cja »

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #142
wgerard wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the case of jaywalking, the answer is simple. You just make it legal. Cars can slow down. Mmmm I dunno about that. Drivers have minimum reaction times and cars have stopping distances. Giving pedestrians the right-of-way in every situation seems like a recipe for a lot of collisions. It could work, but I think it would involve re-designing countless intersections to provide higher visibility of pedestrians for d…

UK has never had jaywalking laws. Most countries don't. We have crossings too, of course, which are optional, but sensible to use when it's rush hours etc. There's no sign that our collisions or injuries are disproportionately high. A pedestrian crosses when they feel it is safe to do so, and anywhere along the road they choose. Having started to cross they have priority over traffic. Lately some drivers are less inc…

"Having started to cross they have priority over traffic" - Not true and potentially dangerous misinformation.

Jaywalking controls are stupid because: 1. They restrict the freedom of pedestrians. 2. They encourage extra pedestrian crossings, which increases the number of hazards to drivers. 3. They move responsibility for pedestrian safety from pedestrians to drivers.

As a Briton, it always feels like living in some authoritarian, ultra-controlled future to be at a roadside in another country, with no cars within range, and not to be allowed to walk across to the other side.

Post reply on HN