Police in England installed an AI camera system along a major road. It caught almost 300 drivers in its first 3 days.::An AI camera system installed along a major road in England caught 300 offenses in its first 3 days.There were 180 seat belt offenses and 117 mobile phone

  • EndlessApollo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    He’ll yea use machines to strip people of their freedom and privacy in exchange for “safety” and “security”, that could never go wrong

    • xT1TANx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      I understand your pov but I feel it’s misplaced. You are in public in a vehicle. You are in public on a side walk. The same laws that have been used to record police are the same being used here. You have no expectation of privacy in public and if you are seen or recorded breaking a law that is on you.

        • xT1TANx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I don’t think you understand my point. It’s been made clear the First Amendment applies to filming anyone, including police, in public. Any policies that try to bypass that will be destroyed in court. Those same rules apply to all of us as well.

          We can absolutely be recorded in public.

          • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You know the Constitution has no power in the UK where this camera is right? Not that I’m opposed to it.

            • xT1TANx@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The post I responded to indicated the US and UK. Of course I know that we never invaded and subjugated the English. Clearly I was talking about the US, so ya got me. Pat yourself on the back.

      • EndlessApollo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Just because someone is in public doesn’t mean that they need to be under 24/7 surveillance by big brother. Isn’t England already infested with security cameras? The US is pretty lousy with them in some places and if I knew they were actively watching me I’d make a habit of breaking them, not praise them for helping to overpolice every square inch of the country

        • xT1TANx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Again, if you can be seen in public you already are. Anyone is a witness to your crimes.

          • Blimp7990@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Again, if you can be seen in public you already are. Anyone is a witness to your crimes.

            can you list out your crimes you committed today pls? We know you did, its impossible to have not. You might not know you did, but you did. We all saw it.

              • CalvinCopyright@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Allow me to rephrase that. If an authority figure wants to prosecute you for whatever reason, even if you’ve been perfectly “legal”, they will make up a crime you committed based on something they didn’t like about you. This driving-camera crap just gives them more opportunities.

                I got ticketed not too long ago because a police officer thought I was texting when I wasn’t doing anything other than looking at Google Maps. You don’t have to have committed a crime. You just have to have yourself recorded in a way that looks like you might have committed a crime. There is a VERY BIG DIFFERENCE between those qualifiers, and it is ripe for abuse. Innocence doesn’t prove innocence, and proving innocence is what matters.

                • xT1TANx@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Hey, sorry to hear you got hosed. I think the thing a lot of people who follow cases of police corruption are beginning to realize is always be filming yourself in your car. Have front and rear cams and to your point here, having an in cabin camera might not be bad. It sucks that this is where we are unfortunately. Have the evidence of your innocence.

                  • Blimp7990@reddthat.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    what a twisted world view you have – even though it is literally impossible to know the law (its not even countable how many laws there are), you think its fine to record people’s every move while in public and try to fine them for arbitrary misbehaviors…and when that power is inevitably abused, your response is to also record yourself constantly? i sincerely hope you are nowhere near a position of authority.