A HN audience is so sure to parse "WA" as Washington state that leaving it in the title would be misleading with every second response along the lines of "I only clicked because I thought it was Washington".
Should it be expanded to "Aussie"? (since "West Australian", "Australian", "Sandgroper", or "Doubleyooalien drivers" doesn't fit the title field).
I reckon the location is secondary and the interesting part is about technology enabling universal and intrusive enforcement of easy to break rules that were previously difficult to enforce absolutely.
Such rules tend to have rather draconian 'example making' penalties attached to them because of that.
Is AI camera enforcement 'not a problem' in Honduras or Washington State because they don't use them there yet? Is seeing how it pans out somewhere else first of no interest to them?
I am very torn on this, because something absolutely needs to be done about phone usage while driving as it's just genuinely shocking.
On the other hand, such pervasive and ever present law enforcement is oppressive. If the majority of your citizens are breaking a law, then your citizenship clearly thinks the law is unnecessary. We give road laws a pass because safety is quite provable through studies and we listen to our researchers, but if we scaled this out to all crimes (like jaywalking) I think you would see just about everyone is a criminal eventually.
> because something absolutely needs to be done about phone usage while driving as it's just genuinely shocking.
It's actually very simple. Put a cop by the sidewalk, have them stop people and issue a fine. You'd be making several grand every day. I would do it myself, but I am not authorized to stop people and take their money. There is no need for cameras when the violations are so blatantly obvious and recurring.
I think it's great how beurocrats are institutionalising everything, everywhere, at least for people who work, sort of a prequil to the way the same technology is bieng use for genocide in Palestine, with of course the profits from these operations, going to funding the genocide, directly.
Oh yes. Let's trade you being able to be on your phone while driving for centralized networkec access to realtime camera feeds for a bunch of Big Brother's. No. No thanks.
Western Australia drivers reeling after passengers caught out by AI cameras
Don't know why OP dropped an important regional distinction.. not a problem in Honduras, for example. Or Washington state
A HN audience is so sure to parse "WA" as Washington state that leaving it in the title would be misleading with every second response along the lines of "I only clicked because I thought it was Washington".
Should it be expanded to "Aussie"? (since "West Australian", "Australian", "Sandgroper", or "Doubleyooalien drivers" doesn't fit the title field).
I reckon the location is secondary and the interesting part is about technology enabling universal and intrusive enforcement of easy to break rules that were previously difficult to enforce absolutely.
Such rules tend to have rather draconian 'example making' penalties attached to them because of that.
Is AI camera enforcement 'not a problem' in Honduras or Washington State because they don't use them there yet? Is seeing how it pans out somewhere else first of no interest to them?
W.Aus. maybe? As many characters as Aussie. I didn’t have a problem finding out it was WA from the article, though.
I am very torn on this, because something absolutely needs to be done about phone usage while driving as it's just genuinely shocking.
On the other hand, such pervasive and ever present law enforcement is oppressive. If the majority of your citizens are breaking a law, then your citizenship clearly thinks the law is unnecessary. We give road laws a pass because safety is quite provable through studies and we listen to our researchers, but if we scaled this out to all crimes (like jaywalking) I think you would see just about everyone is a criminal eventually.
In a democracy, that policy would get you removed from office. Don't hassle your own voters.
> because something absolutely needs to be done about phone usage while driving as it's just genuinely shocking.
It's actually very simple. Put a cop by the sidewalk, have them stop people and issue a fine. You'd be making several grand every day. I would do it myself, but I am not authorized to stop people and take their money. There is no need for cameras when the violations are so blatantly obvious and recurring.
They did this for a while, I don't know what the outcome was.
> If the majority of your citizens are breaking a law, then your citizenship clearly thinks the law is unnecessary.
Which law do you think the majority of the citizenship here is breaking?
I'm not thinking of any, we wouldn't know until we had infallible ever present enforcement.
Australia has an enormous amount of traffic cameras and hand out tickets like I hand out candy on Halloween.
I think it's great how beurocrats are institutionalising everything, everywhere, at least for people who work, sort of a prequil to the way the same technology is bieng use for genocide in Palestine, with of course the profits from these operations, going to funding the genocide, directly.
self driving cars can't come fast enough
Oh yes. Let's trade you being able to be on your phone while driving for centralized networkec access to realtime camera feeds for a bunch of Big Brother's. No. No thanks.