871–880 of 940 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been wondering why Amazon oriented their smart lock delivery service to an orwellian camera and lock in the home setup instead of hooked to an outdoor box like this.
Because they want to deliver groceries into your fridge in the near future.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is also the norm in the UK. If you're not in they try and leave the package with a neighbour. If that doesn't work, they'll try again, and if you're not there again, try for for a neighbour again. If that fails for a second time, they leave it at a nearby depot for you to pick it up. I've never heard of a package being stolen here in the UK.
America: "It's a real problem! There is no solution!" Overseas viewer: "This literally never happens here. Try solution (a), (b), or maybe (c) and see if that helps?" America: "Yep there is no solution in the entire universe" Substitute "package theft" for: Gun crime / public healthcare / public education / insert social issue here
The package theft "solutions" proposed really are insanely inconvenient and unworkable* in most suburban environments. I've seen all of the reasons listed many places here, so I won't bother rehashing them. If I'm at work on Tuesday, for example, a redelivery attempt on Wednesday doesn't really help, does it?
* unworkable in the sense that they're less efficient than the alternative of just allowing the rare package theft to occur
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I’m proposing is simply that we privatize large parts of society and exclude people from the private areas based on their tendency to be bad actors. Have these people been convicted of crimes? Because if they haven't, then yes, actually you are absolutely advocating restricting freedoms, and stumbling dangerously close to advocating redlining which has been illegal in the US for decades. Edit: Pardon my double p…
No more than you're curtailing my freedom by not letting me into your home. I've been convicted of nothing but you won't just let me into your home.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think even just the sink bomb part that instantly emptied as soon as it was opened would have the same effect. It's probably easier to build and could all be done mechanically. You can get some pretty foul stink bombs, then triple it. If it made their car unsellable out their house miserable I'd call that a success and no one got hurt.
There's a line that might open you up to being sued over it. Ridiculous as that would be, I wouldn't really be surprised if the right lawyer in the right court could pull it off.
Whether a prosecutor and/or a jury would be interested in that argument is another story.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That was for the first one though, where all he had was a random persons face, way harder to actually track that person down. For the later ones like the car and even more so the apartment/house it's a much easier case so they might have actually bothered because they can directly link the theft to an actual ID through the plates/address. Even with that the chances they'd bother is medium to low but it's much more li…
But is it there actually a crime in this case if the owner intended for the package to be stolen (of which there is also video evidence)?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm skeptical this applies to someone coming onto your property (let alone coming with malicious intent). Do trespassers have a reasonable expectation of privacy?
I was referring to the parts of the video where they brought the device into their car or home. This was obviously designed to continue recording the thieves in those private places. It just seems like a bad idea to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Get out of your bubble? Swipes like that break the HN guidelines. Can you please edit them out of what you post here? Your comment would be better without that sentence, and maybe also the patronizing bit at the end ("these kinds of posts always illicit irrelevant responses"). https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I'm going to disagree with this being a "swipe" because at the root of it is a critical cautionary tale that I think we should be sharing more of on HN: What you (the global "you") experience in the world and the results of your interaction are not a template, and other people's experiences may sometimes preclude them from truly realizing, appreciating and unpacking why people in other social groups might see interac…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm actually surprised the youtube-guy doesn't go back to the police at this point, because what they have stolen is a prototype-product, which is worth whatever the inventor says it is worth; Anyone taking this package is committing a felony at this point - which might be worth these lazy-ass cops' time.
> I'm actually surprised the youtube-guy doesn't go back to the police at this point, because what they have stolen is a prototype-product, which is worth whatever the inventor says it is worth No, it's worth whatever a court determines the fair market value is.
Maybe you do have to argue the point in court, but 6 months of R&D is easily worth way more than $1000.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm going to disagree with this being a "swipe" because at the root of it is a critical cautionary tale that I think we should be sharing more of on HN: What you (the global "you") experience in the world and the results of your interaction are not a template, and other people's experiences may sometimes preclude them from truly realizing, appreciating and unpacking why people in other social groups might see interac…
That all makes sense. I called it a swipe because it was a personal ("your") pejorative ("bubble"). It's not necessary to do that—posts get better without it—and it routinely has negative side effects.
Matter of perspective, no, Dan? Would it have been less of a pejorative to borrow a phrase from the latest incantation of our discussions of race and culture in the US to say "check your privilege?"
Granted this isn't the place for a protracted discussion on dialogue here, I just find the strong reaction to what is a very important clarion call to evaluate ones own biases and experiences against a spectrum of biases and experiences shared by every other human being, however curt or brief, taking it the point of calling it a "pejorative" an interesting reaction-IMO.