Imagine the alternative headline saying the murderers used Waymo for their drive-by assassination. There is only one option for Waymo here, and the idiocy of the US police is not within their power to solve.
https://medium.com/luminasticity/the-illuminati-ganga-automa...
What part of funny-or-die suggested anything following should be taken seriously? You might be interested in reading about creative licensing, make believe, parody, or any other style.
The 90s were lit
Nah you're right tho let's imagine the worst case scenario. What if that person in the waymo had a nuclear bomb in their suitcase? There's only one option
I also grew up in the 90s and did things like throw eggs out of cars. We wouldn't have done it from a taxi or Uber. Your comment really makes no sense.
Everyone who got out of that decade alive and with at most minimal brain damage thinks that we're too obsessed with safety today.
;-)
There must be a word for this, but the issue today is the normalization of zero-risk.
Did some kids likely die because of the shenanigans free range kids were allowed in the 70s - 90s?
Sure!
Were those kids as cohorts on the whole better off because of the freedom they were allowed at formative years?
I'd be hard pressed to argue against that...
Sometimes it takes a few broken eggs (or children) to make an omelette (a responsible and creative adult).
Maximize the good to each individual, but only up until it begins impacting the good of the many.
People do definitely use regular taxis to transport both drugs and weapons sometimes
This is why public restrooms in the US are vandalized, why there are low effort graffiti tags all over, litter in parks, and more.
People believing that something is watching - a human or machine with the autonomy to enact consequences - preserves the commons for the rest of us.
People just dont vadalize stuff - there are reasons for that that need to be fixed, not adding even more spying.
In general, I think you kinda need to fix people rather than make the environment basically so hostile to everyone, to prevent a small group of people from breaking it. Not saying its easy, but in my the only correct way.
Like, in general, you kinda want people to be good parent so their children end up as decent humans (that for example don't vandalize public restrooms for fun). But any direct attempts to control that process, even if well meant, would be rightfully considered a horrendous form of government/societal meddling. So it is definitely hard.
In any case, I think removing as many sources or uncertainty and stress as possible (stable income, affordable housing, no naked corruption visible day by day, etc.) could hopefully have positive outcomes on parenting without direct interference with the process. And I guess a better founded & more prestigious for the teach school system could also help.
My wife and I like watching real-life police detective shows. Sometimes we discuss mistakes the killer made, and how we’d avoid them. “I wouldn’t kill anyone, but if I did, I wouldn’t cheap out and keep the clothes I wore to do it instead of tossing them into a river.” Of course we’re not going to do that, but it’s a puzzle to solve, so we try to solve it. We would not have those conversations around a taxi driver or a crowded subway, lest someone overhear and get the wrong idea. On an empty subway or Waymo? Yeah, sure. And if BART or my cab reported us for planning a murder, I’d be livid enough to plan how to murder the computer that made the decision to rat me out.
Other countries already have highway cameras track speed and automatically issue citations. I am happy for Americans to petition their government against implementing that, but I won't pretend it's anything other than a desire to break the law for personal gratification.
Every uber driver I’ve been ive been in has an inside dashcam to protect themselves and their property. I would do the same thing if I were them.
Waymo has every right to monitor their property and if someone does something illegal in their car why would they not report? An Uber driver would do the same, as would I. Otherwise you are an accomplice.
This comparison to Flock is bunk. Flock cameras are in public places and paid for with public dollars. I don’t want that.
But in a surveillance state, every private citizen should be keeping their own footage. Nobody is going to share theirs with you.
Other people’s footage will only be used against you.
It is a real big shame that Meta is the only one pushing personal video capture right now. It has tainted the idea of personal surveillance as a counter to all this madness.
Some people foresee a future where self-driving cars are the norm. The big prize being fewer deaths on the road (about 40k people per year in the USA) which is a pretty big prize.
If today's self-driving cars are heavy on the AI surveillance of passengers, and you foresee self-driving cars doing 90% of journeys within your lifetime, that's a pretty ominous situation.
Especially if you interpret it in light of EU driver-facing-camera mandates.
We should try to separate "self driving" from "owned and operated by someone else." One is good and one is very bad.
Private surveillance that immediately sends any and all crimes to law enforcement is indistinguishable from government surveillance and should treated the same way.
Don’t use Snapchat then…
https://www.gadgetreview.com/student-teacher-sent-a-private-...
And I'm not even convinced that human drivers would be more discerning or rational about it. They could easily overstate the issue to police and create a more biased situation.
We need to (be able to) trust the police to not escalate irresponsibly and to deal with situations with nuance. Declining to escalate to authorities because we're scared of what they may do is not great.
And it’s also not easy to tell toys from real guns. Many cities illegalized toy guns on public transit because people were putting orange tips on real guns to make them look like toys. 3D-printed guns rarely look like they can actually fire, even though they can.
It's that way because real guns weren't available in Japan but real-ism wasn't defined, so Japanese toy gun brands just turned that volume up to 1100 without allowing toy guns take pressure bearing gun parts. And then those toy guns got exported and copied, leading to the present status.
Any gun shooting projectiles out of a moving vehicle is dangerous. Pellet guns and paintball guns are less dangerous than “regular” guns, but they’re not really toys.
Given how much money Google gives to electoral campaigns, I'd argue that it is in their power but that's the least of their problems when they interfere with the democratic process. They are too busy voting for less taxes and regulations on their business.