We got a new expression it seems. Used to have "drive-by shooting", now we're gonna have "drive-by witnessing" :)
Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla
521–530 of 683 posts
Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla
#522Earlier quoted context omitted.
Law simply needs to internalize encryption. Your cameras are your property and only with consent of owner are they available to authorities. Public cameras should only be decrypted for evidence to support litigation of crimes, not for police to search for violay, because the current gigantic book of laws has an implicit assumption of a difficulty to enforce. If suddenly police could use AI to fully prosecute all viol…
This is already in the US Constitution. 4th Amendment.
Sure by some interpretations. Unfortunately the current SCOTUS doesn’t see it that way, they think webcams and electronic surveillance should be in the constitution or authorities can do anything. If there isn’t a law or constitutional text to the effect then it doesn’t exist to them. So we have to approach this from actually getting a law passed.
Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla
#523Earlier quoted context omitted.
The incidental and systemic benefits of the recordings are exciting to people and celebrated with stories. The hazards of this constant "pollution" of data — how it is slowly changing our society, our economy, our humanity — is harder to quantify or build opposition to. It's a bit like climate change. Slow, invisible poison.
> and celebrated with stories. Are you sure those are organic?
I’m sure the vast majority of them are. Occam’s razor version: fear sells. If you can appeal to the clutching pearls part of the psyche then you can win over people to the idea of constant surveillance as necessary because of the current “wave of crime”. No matter how much crime is down or how many rights have to be taken away for “public safety”. Most reporters are just trying to put food on the table and outside of freedom of the press they couldn’t care less.
Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla
#524Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there any tangible reason that would actually weight enough to justify not actively wanting to provide basically free resources in help of uncovering (and in effect: preventing) a violent crime? Because, if not, this is about as "creepy" as those nerdy guys sitting in their bedrooms and basements, tinkering with their silly computers all day, meaning: Non-conformist and something you might just not be ready to thi…
yes there is a valid reason to be opposed to this. Yes everyone one wants to stop violent crimes and murders and that is not a bad thing. But as history has shown time and time again if the people in power decide to become a tyrant and start to abuse the technology then we have a problem. Imagine if this was around 60 years ago. You go into a bar. Some cars have driven past the bar right as you entered a few weeks pa…
Our freedom comes from sources other than technological privacy. It comes from our ability to be in charge of the law and to make the normal fun we want to be legal, legal.
I would be mich more concerned with regulatory capture by the spying corporations or laws passed by a minority seeking to impose a religious based set of laws than car cameras.
As you point out, you can be arrested for being gay without all those cameras, but the possibility of making laws to protect the right to be gay is also doable.
And if you don't think any sort of consumer right to own your data law will be lobbied against by Google and Meta lobbiests, well I think you are wrong.
Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla
#525Phew... good thing that the eye recording implant hasn't been invented yet, or some of us would have their personal life turned into an evidence log.
Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla
#526I don't own a Tesla, and frankly, don't want to own anything associated with Musk. However, I do have dash cams in both my vehicles that will start recording when the car is not running.
If I was driving in my car near a crime scene and discovered my dash cam recorded something that could be used as evidence, personally, I would call the local police and ask them if they were interested. However, to have the police discover my vehicle was in close proximity to the crime, and me not realizing my dash cam had recorded anything of value, and then the police try to impound my vehicle in a parking lot without my knowledge is outrageous!
The above situation is the result of two major realities: once again technology has emerged without adequate laws to deal with the consequences.(I realize this is usually the norm, law makers MUST speed up the process to protect citizens.) Second, police reform has to bring local law enforcement up to date with current reality. (The seizing of a vehicle based on possible crime info isn't protecting citizens, it's theft. Contacting the vehicle owner and requesting the info is serving the citizens, if they're not willing there is a court system.)
Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla
#527Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where I lived in Europe (as an American), jaywalking wasn’t illegal. They didn’t even really consider it weird. After all, you’re just walking . In fact, if you were in the street and a car hit you, the car driver had to prove that it was unavoidable to miss you, otherwise the driver was at fault. It was also illegal to intentionally block traffic as a pedestrian unless you were at a crosswalk. But there was no law t…
As of the beginning of 2023, jaywalking is no longer a thing in California. The only time a cop can cite you is if you're doing something dangerous. If it's safe for you to cross on a red light, or in the middle of a road not near an intersection, that's legally fine now. Of course, the loophole is large enough to drive a truck through: if a cop wants to, they can decide you're walking "dangerously" as a pretense to…
As someone who walks around San Jose quite a lot, on many roads it is safer to cross in the middle of the block than at the intersections. You only have one or two directions to check, and incoming cars have better visibility than at an intersection. And you don't have the failure mode of the car not stopping for the red light.
Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla
#528There was a recent murder caught in HD by a Tesla in a hotel parking lot. The quality is unreal: https://youtu.be/ij85PgNjqAI?si=lGlJBOWdgLDSKSj7
Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla
#529Earlier quoted context omitted.
The first stop is for the crosswalk. (I might do this even when the light is green if there is a pedestrian in the crosswalk since never hitting a pedestrian is a rule of mine.) If I see a pedestrian in or approaching the crosswalk I wait here until they are completely cleared. Then I slowly roll forward for the second stop. This is the stop I use to check for approaching motor traffic. I have better visibility now b…
I don't really find anything wrong with your approach (I do the double-stop sometimes too, if conditions warrant it). But coming to a complete stop (once or twice), for many intersections, for many road conditions, for many times of day, is not going to meaningfully increase anyone's level of safety (yours, another driver's, a cyclist's, a pedestrian's...) vs. a momentary pretty-much-but-not-really-stopped stop. To u…
Sure, I'll agree that there may be times when the "extra" caution is unwarranted by the situation at the intersection. But by doing this every time I ingrain it as an automatic habit which greatly reduces my ongoing risk of failing to use extra caution at some point where it is warranted!
Since the failure mode is an auto accident and the cost of the habit is marginal I feel comfortable promoting this behavior. I have definitely seen accidents and many near misses caused by people who failed to come to a complete stop and look around when conditions did warrant it.
Another lesson I learned in driver's ed is that traffic approaching from the left can be traveling at a speed that completely synchronizes with the A-pillar of your moving vehicle, causing it to be completely invisible to you right up until the moment it collides with your front driver's side fender. This is why I stop and move my head around while I look, to make sure I'm not missing anything. I'm just a stupid human after all.
Re: Did your car witness a crime? Bay Area police may be coming for your Tesla
#530Earlier quoted context omitted.
Around 10-30% of drivers in the United States don't have car insurance depending on the state. It really depends on the state on how strict they are with car insurance. My state is very lax and they don't even really check at the DMV. The fine for not having car insurance is also only ~300 bucks and a 90 day license suspension and it only goes up slightly until like the 4-5 time you get caught. It just honestly doesn…
> Insurance in general is a whole racket. Its literally only works due to the fact people on average pay more than they receive. "Oh but what if a bad thing happens" way to live your life, disregarding economics and averages. That's literally the _entire_ point of insurance. You pay a little more than the average you're expected to actually need so that, in the event of a catastrophic event, your not on the hook for…
I am saying insurance as a concept is stupid and anyone who has insurance is dumb except in few rare cases caused by government tipping the scales of the market.
The only thing baffling here us your reading comprehension bud.
You missed my entire point. You think I think that? Well, if I was on another website I would say something about you as a person about the type of human being who can't even understand what they are reading but then replies with an ignorant comment.