all 33 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 54 points 3 months ago (7 children)

You don't discuss anything with Flock.

You just run roughshod over all of their concerns, and smash their cameras.

Essentially, treat them exactly the way they're treating you.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Definitely don't go buy a bunch of cheap hacksaws and hand them out to unhoused people with a promise of cash for each camera. And certainly don't tell them that the materials making up the camera are probably worth something and they can keep them after giving you proof of destruction.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    This is great way to get people to build their own flock cameras they can "destroy" to get cash from you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Why would they? It takes a long time to do that and there are a lot of flock cameras already there. Unless you're talking about hidden agents for the establishment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    A perverse incentive occurs when it's easier to game the system than to use it as intended. Most people don't put extra effort into gaming the system. And you could always just set the reward at less than the value of the raw materials, so that they'd only profit if they were taking someone else's cameras.

    Not that you should do any of that, of course.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    I was joking about building cameras.

    But in reality you would face similar issues. How would people prove they destroy a camera? Show it to you? They would show you the same camera multiple times. You would mark it? They would remove the mark. You would take some crucial part with you (the lens?)? They would look for other cameras with same lens, maybe already broken ones. You could probably establish some working system but people are not stupid and they would try to game the system.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    If two journalists testing cars are able to get targeted this badly by the police, what percentage of average citizens are going to be harassed by police using false data and fudged reports, where literally nobody in the command chain is ever held responsible?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago

    Hell, if I ever end up in a hit and run, I'm half tempted to be like "idk, it happened so fast but I think the plate was [old boss's plate]." Seems like open season on poison data with enough plausible deniability.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    So, how hard would it be to get flock to flag their own CEO's car?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    Because their system is secure, or because he doesn't have a car?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago

    Every separate violation should be a billion dollar fine, to go in the America First Fund, which will provide the seed money for social programs like Medicare 4 All, Free college/trade school, student loan forgiveness, etc.

    That's also where we should put the fortunes we confiscate from Sociopathic Oligarchs, as well returned tariffs, corporate fines, etc. Don't just stick it in the general fund where it will be wasted on weapons of mass destruction.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (13 children)

    Are there any implementations of camera based traffic safety networks that are actually kind of good, in terms of privacy, responsible data handling, and effectiveness?

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    No and none of us should have to live with cameras constantly pointed at us.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    I live in a place with a lot of traffic violence, and there's negligible enforcement. I'm looking for a practical way to keep drivers accountable and reduce the violence.

    I think cameras on the intersections have to be part of that strategy. I'm inclined to believe a responsible implementation is possible, and I'd like to see more discussion of what that could look like.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    If I'm crossing the street and get mowed down in a hit and run, the car's dash cam footage probably won't be found.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (4 children)

    Radar traps. They only snap a picture if someone is going above the speed limit, in a wrong lane (e.g. bus lane) or over a red light.

    Any arguments against them are usually analogous to sugar companies opposing a sugar tax because it would lead to poor grammy being unable to afford to sweeten her morning coffee anymore.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (3 children)

    yeah I still can't believe these got banned in Ontario. so much more effective and safe in school zones than speed bumps or artificial lane narrowing

    although fines should have been raised, like all vehicle fines, to a % of income/wealth

    and I will admit that I don't know how you ensure that they don't become like Flock

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    Wait, how are they better than speed bumps?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    speed bumps are distracting and pull driver's attention from their surroundings, result in people accelerating loudly from bump to bump, create inconsistent traffic from people constantly accelerating and decelerating, are annoying on bikes when implemented poorly, slow down emergency vehicles, are annoying for everyone when somebody is pulling a trailer, are annoying for drivers who aren't even speeding, create difficulty plowing...

    a camera is just there and fines the owner of the vehicle

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    excellent writeup

    but nothing new. just lazy cops being lazy, seems like.

    how many infractions before they get fired and blacklisted?

  • source